Jpierreg

Just place {{db-author}} at the top of the page and an admin will zap it for you. - Draeco 01:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on a page. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing. --InShaneee 19:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

User InShanee has in fact reverted back 3 times from the following fairer introduction:

Scientology is a system of beliefs and practices created by American writer L. Ron Hubbard in 1952 as a self-help philosophy. L. Ron Hubbard is mainly regarded by many of his critics as a pulp fiction author.

>> Back to the least fair introduction:

Scientology is a system of beliefs and practices created by American pulp fiction^[1] author L. Ron Hubbard in 1952 as a self-help philosophy.

Here below are links to L. Ron Hubbard's different works:

L. Ron Hubbard: The Writer [1]

L. Ron Hubbard: The Philosopher [2]

L. Ron Hubbard: The Humanitarian [3]

L. Ron Hubbard: The Artist [4]

L. Ron Hubbard: The Poet/Lyricist [5]

L. Ron Hubbard: Adventurer/Explorer [6]

See also L. Ron Hubbard: The Profile [7]

And L. Ron Hubbard site: [8]

Jpierreg 15:40, 18 May 2006 (GMT)

The 'insert image' button will work if the pic has already been uploaded to Wikipedia, but if it hasn't, then you can upload a new picture yourself here (also accesible through the "Upload file" link in the toolbox to the left). You need to be fairly careful about assigning a license to the picture and not uploading copyvio images, but all of that is detailed at the main upload screen. - Draeco 03:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Angela Beesley

Jimmy Wales Carrer

Wikimedia Foundation Key People

• "'Silent Birth': Separating Reality From Myth, Church Of Scientology International" (Press release). Church Of Scientology International. 2006-04-20. Retrieved 2006-09-26. {{cite press release}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

Good work at Doctrine of Exchange -- the material you added was well-referenced and added to an NPOV presentation of the subject. I did notice, though, that the quote seems to be missing a word? It starts "Whoever wants receive ..." instead of "Whoever wants to receive", so I suspected a typo. (I'd look it up myself, but my copy of Fundamentals is buried somewhere in my bookpile, who knows how far down...) You might also want to add a page number to the reference, to help people find if they want to look into that quote. -- Antaeus Feldspar 14:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I know it from memory. I'll check for the page. Do you have a hardback or softback ? Jpierreg 15:20, 22 September 2006 (GMT)

Paperback, actually. It's also a much later edition than the 1965 version in your reference, so the page number almost certainly wouldn't be the same. -- Antaeus Feldspar 16:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I couldn't find it. I have erased it from the page since it's only fair till I find it againJpierreg 19:00, 22 September 2006 (GMT)

Well, if you think that's best, then we can hold off until we know we have the reference solid. Perhaps this weekend I'll dig and see if I can find my paperback after all and look for that quote. -- Antaeus Feldspar 21:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

There is already a link on the Scientology page (currently footnote #48) to bonafides which is IMO a better link than experts as everything is in HTML, not PDF.

Unfortunately the two lists of expertises are not the same, the bonafide one is shorter but includes a new paper by Wilson. My impression is that they've omitted the more controversial ones that attack apostates (Kliever) or hint at secrets (Sivertsev).

So far as I know the only critique of these papers is my own: reviews Though I'm not supposed to link to my own pages!

So link to both? Either? Add a link to the critique?

--Hartley Patterson 12:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Clarifications: Theology & Practice of a Contemporary Religion. Church of Scientology.

is a book from the Church of Scientology

reviews is a personal web page with personal opinion(s). Jpierreg 15:52, 29 October 2006 (GMT)

true, and so not really appropriate. --Hartley Patterson 09:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Why do you keep using a formatting style intended for citing references in the External Links sections of articles? It's making the sections needlessly complicated and hard to read, both for editors and for casual readers. WP:EL is quite specific about to list external links in its "How to list" section: [9] At the very least, please stop placing an unnecessary link to Church of Scientology in the unnecessary "Publisher" field in every one of these links, it's extremely disruptive. wikipediatrix 05:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Check the post I left you on the talk page for Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health... I don't think either of the links you've added to Supernatural abilities in Scientology doctrine have much to do with the subject of the article either. An official Scientology page about Operating Thetan levels or Exteriorization would be more appropriate than these generic "success stories" links . wikipediatrix 17:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

I will answer shortly Jpierreg 17:18, 11 November 2006 (GMT)

Sorry to be a pest. I do support a lot of the links you've been adding recently, though. wikipediatrix 17:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

I know you are not a pest and that you can demonstrate fairness sometimes but sometimes you seams to overeact as if, may be, you were too tired. Jpierreg 17:24, 11 November 2006 (GMT)

I'd like to hear your two cents on the talk page discussions about renaming Space opera in Scientology doctrine and Supernatural abilities in Scientology doctrine. The anti-Scientologist bias on these pages includes literally everything Hubbard ever said, even offhand remarks in 1950s lectures, and treats them as official Church of Scientology doctrine - which just isn't true. Highfructosecornsyrup 05:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I'll be happy to help and give my opinion on this matter. Just first feel free to drop me an email so I can introduce myself and you could do the same. Looking forward to hearing from you. Jpierreg 12:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

You may want to address this User talk:Wikipediatrix --Justanother 23:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sure! I actually like talking to myself sometimes on my discussion page as per above. Thank you for letting me know anyhow there was mention of my user account - Jpierreg 08:11, 9 December 2006 (GMT)

I'm confused about your message on my page. what was that about? Johnpedia 21:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

That was just to raise your awareness with some history of what had happened before -- Jpierreg 15:45, 4 January 2007 (GMT)

hahahahahahahhaa right, ok, that's really great, that was a waste of my time, thanks. i don't get "oh my.."ed by something as lame as that. and how many non-scientologists have been banned? scary! wise up old man.Johnpedia 18:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

User:Highfructosecornsyrup (Wikipediatrix who then took a different stance towards Scn WP articles for some time) is the only non-scientologist user account that was blocked that I know of. Otherwise there was also User:Olberon but on the Swedish Wikipedia apparently (see [10]). Jpierreg 07:25, 5 January 2007 (GMT)

Hi jpierreg,

I don't want to register an e-mail, but can you let me know what it was you had a question about, specifically?

Best wishes, S. M. Sullivan 05:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Here's mine then jeanpierregin@yahoo.co.uk

Jpierreg 05:05, 5 January 2007 (GMT)

I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for participating in the RfC about Justanother. Anynobody 02:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome! :) --Jpierreg 08:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi. What do you think of my summary? --Justanother 15:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oops! I actually didn't see the -endorse heading- at the button of your summary. Now I've bolded it so it's visible here --Jpierreg 16:29, 9 March 2007 (GMT:)

• I have done some updating to the WP:SCN, added some new articles, added a "to do" list to the top of the project, and fixed up some categories and assessment stuff. I suggest we should all pick one article at a time, or at most two, to work on bringing up to Featured Article status. You could give input on the project's talk page... Smee 21:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC).Reply
  • Also, a Userbox for project members, {{User Scientology project}} Smee 21:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC).Reply

Heeeeeello! Are you still around? COFS 18:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

An article that you have been involved in editing, The Scientology Handbook, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Scientology Handbook. Thank you. Coffeepusher (talk) 00:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

This is to notify you that you have been added as a involved party to the Scientology arbitration case; this is either because you have been mentioned in the /Evidence, the /Workshop or their talk pages, or because you are closely connected with it.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, KnightLago (talk) 14:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following editors are subjected to bans/topic-bans/restrictions as listed below :

• Banned : John254 (talk · contribs) (Community Ban), Justallofthem (talk · contribs)
• Topic-banned : CSI LA (talk · contribs), Grrrilla (talk · contribs), Makoshack (talk · contribs), Proximodiz (talk · contribs), Su-Jada (talk · contribs), TaborG (talk · contribs), Jack Russell Terrier (talk · contribs), Jpierreg (talk · contribs), Maureen D (talk · contribs), OngoingHow (talk · contribs), Seelltey (talk · contribs), Tturrisi (talk · contribs), Voxpopulis (talk · contribs), AndroidCat (talk · contribs), Antaeus Feldspar (talk · contribs), Anynobody (talk · contribs), Derflipper (talk · contribs), Fahrenheit451 (talk · contribs), Misou (talk · contribs), Orsini (talk · contribs), Shrampes (talk · contribs), Shutterbug (talk · contribs), Steve Dufour (talk · contribs), Tilman (talk · contribs), The Legendary Shadow! (talk · contribs), Touretzky (talk · contribs)
• To contact the Committee : Arnielerma*, Karin Spaink*, StephenAKent*, Timbowles*, Tory Christman*, Hkhenson*, Rick Alan Ross (talk · contribs)
• Other restrictions :
  • Jossi (talk · contribs) gave up his status as an administrator in the face of controversy concerning his administrator actions during an arbitration case, he may not be automatically re-granted adminship. However, he is free to seek readminship, should he choose to do so, at any time by a request for adminship at Requests for adminship.
  • ChrisO (talk · contribs) is to abide to a binding voluntary restriction that within the Scientology topic (i) he limits his edits to directly improving articles to meet GA and FA criteria, using reliable sources; (ii) he makes no edits of whatever nature to biographies of living people; and (iii) he refrains from sysop action of whatever nature.
  • Jayen466 (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles about Rick Ross, broadly defined.

#Editors marked in * have since contacted the Committee.

Any editor who is subject to remedies in this proceeding, or who wishes to edit from an open proxy, is restricted to a single current or future account to edit Scientology-related topics and may not contribute to the topic as anonymous IP editors. Editors topic banned by remedies in this proceeding are prohibited (i) from editing articles related to Scientology or Scientologists, broadly defined, as well as the respective article talk pages and (ii) from participating in any Wikipedia process relating to those articles. Editors topic banned above may apply to have the topic ban lifted after demonstrating their commitment to the goals of Wikipedia and their ability to work constructively with other editors. Applications will be considered no earlier than six months after the close of this case, and additional reviews will be done no more frequently than every six months thereafter.

Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, ban any editor from editing within the Scientology topic. Prior to topic banning the editor, the administrator will leave a message on the editor's talk page, linking to this paragraph, warning the editor that a topic ban is contemplated and outlining the behaviours for which it is contemplated. If the editor fails to heed the warning, the editor may be topic banned, initially, for three months, then with additional topic bans increasing in duration to a maximum of one year. Any editor who, in the judgment of an uninvolved administrator, is (i) focused primarily on Scientology or Scientologists and (ii) clearly engaged in promoting an identifiable agenda may be topic-banned for up to one year.

All IP addresses owned or operated by the Church of Scientology and its associates, broadly interpreted, are to be blocked as if they were open proxies. Any current or future editor who, after this decision is announced, makes substantial edits to any Scientology-related articles or discussions on any page is directed to edit on these from only a single user account, which shall be the user's sole or main account, unless the user has previously sought and obtained permission from the Arbitration Committee to operate a legitimate second account. They shall edit in accordance to Wikipedia policies and refrain from advocacy, to disclose on the relevant talk pages any circumstances (but not including personal identifying information) that constitute or may reasonably be perceived as constituting a conflict of interest with respect to that page, and not through a proxy configuration.

- For the Arbitration Committee, Mailer Diablo 01:36, 29 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply