On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 01:32:25 +0000, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
On 07/14/04 00:26, Sj wrote:
I don't see any reason for our Scientology articles not to be informed by criticisms, suggestions, and edits from Sc. practitioners. Anything unverifiable will have to stay on Talk pages... (and maybe this user can help us flesh out the article on [[Mission Earth]] so that it passes FAC next time. ^ ^ ) + sj +
Not 'practitioners', but the organisation itself. That's different.
Hmm. How does one distinguish? I'm going to suggest this person look at the mission earth article, in any case; let me know if this also seems objectionable to you. ++sj