On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 01:32:25 +0000, David Gerard
<fun(a)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