Jbmweb1
Welcome edit
Welcome...
Hello, Jbmweb1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.
Ocaasi
Hubbard edit
Just to give you a heads up, you're editing one of the most controversial articles in the history of Wikipedia. It became a featured main page article yesterday and it has more editors watching it than almost any other article on the entire site. If you are going to make a definitive change from 'leader' to 'charlatan' on the basis of one court case, without demonstrating an understanding of our WP:NPOV policy, you're going to get reverted over and over. Read around a little and get a feel for how policy affects pages. Having a source is great, but it's not sufficient. The source must be compared to other sources and taken in the full context.
Also, encyclopedic writing always distinguishes points of view (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV) so that readers know if something is widely held or just held by some, whether it is a fact or an opinion, or whether there is a dispute about it. Whether Hubbard is a charlatan depends on who you ask. If you ask the French court, they tell you one thing. If you ask a Scientologist, they tell you another. If you ask me, he's both, but if you ask a professor of New religious movements, they'd probably avoid the c-word. So there is a dispute. The term leader is actually neutral, since even a charlatan would be a leader--it just means head of the organization, something which is not disputed.
If you want to add the fact that Hubbard was ruled a charlatan by the french court, find the appropriate [history] section or [public reception] or [criticism] section, and add it with the source. Probably better to propose it on the talk page first; although WP:BOLD always applies, so does WP:BRD, especially on controversial articles and articles with WP:BLP or WP:LIBEL concerns.
Let me know if you have any questions, Ocaasi (talk) 20:55, 16 March 2011 (UTC)