Comments on: Wikipedia bans known Scientologists from editing articles

By: scientologist

scientologist — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 01:37:24 +0000

No one in Australia does any editing of Wikipedia from the Church of Scientology, but we welcome the actions to make Wikipedia more factual as some of the entries on Scientology have been very hateful and erroneous. What is really important is that Wikipedia has also stopped those involved in biased editing for the purpose of antagonism instead of information. It is good from our perspective. We hope that this will result in more accurate and useful articles on Wikipedia.

There is a problem of truth and balance. For example, the media regarding Wikipedia’s ruling failed to mention that a group of people antagonistic to Scientology were also banned from making edits. That is a huge omission. For Scientologists, one of the other biggest omissions from reporting has also been how much charity and social work we all do. When you dedicate your time and efforts to literacy, drug rehabilitation and criminal reform, and then these media stories or Wikipedia entries don’t reflect it, then this is unbalanced. We have a huge store of information on our programs bettering lives and contributing in the community and society at large. All community groups know what it is like to work hard and selflessly and not get acknowledged for it. Bad, not good new seems to rule the headlines. We, like them, keep going whether or not it is reported on in the media or whether we are criticised or praised. When you help people, you see the changes in them and their life. That’s enough for us.

By: DavidB

DavidB — Sun, 31 May 2009 12:23:51 +0000

That’s ok Jack, this author is prone to producing innacurate and inflammatory opinion pieces here. And whatever editorial staff there is or isn’t at Blorge diesnt care.

By: Jack Nauti

Jack Nauti — Sun, 31 May 2009 05:18:10 +0000

Diebold was NOT at the center of the “hanging chad” controversy in Florida. Electronic voting machines do not have “hanging chads” — only paper ballots do. The paper ballots at the center of that controversy were produced by Sequoia Voting Systems. Google Dan Rather and Sequoia to find out how Sequoia’s management knowingly produced bad ballots that year. Diebold had nothing to do with that one.

By: Fredric L. Rice

Fredric L. Rice — Sat, 30 May 2009 19:26:48 +0000

The notoriously criminal Scientology corporation is at core organized crime, the claims that the company continues to make are always without exception fraud, designed to try to rook and swindle rubes, marks, and suckers in to handing the criminals money.

Cudos to WikiPedia for halting the crime syndicate’s attempts to deny their company’s history of racketeering, blackmail, extortion, fraud, kidnapping, murder, human rights and civil rights abuses, all of which are demonstrable in the extant criminal and civil case records for the criminal enterprise.

I bet the Gambino Mafia would also be banned if they tried to pull the same stunts on WikiPedia as their Scientology colleagues routinely did.