Note that the statement about Pinkett-Smith I quoted in the previous post was not sourced to radaronline.com, but to the West Australian, a Perth newspaper.
What is sourced to radaronline.com
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/08/exclusive-will-jada-new-school...
in the [[New Village Leadership Academy]] article is the statement that the school principal, Piano Foster, has "Scientology associations". Radar in turn sources this to what it calls "an official Scientology list". In fact, this is a private website, truthaboutscientology.com, which since a recent AE thread is no longer considered a reliable source in Wikipedia. The site says the woman once did a Scientology course (Basic Study Manual). Sorry for the mix-up.
Here are some other uses of radaronline.com:
- Used in the [[Rachel Uchitel]] BLP to state that she was photographed entering Tiger Woods's room.
- Used in [[Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew]] to state that "On August 31, RadarOnline reported that Rachel Uchitel, who had been living at a sober living facility in Malibu, California, left the facility with Dr. Pinsky's permission in order to visit the World Trade Center site, where her fiance, James Andrew O'Grady, was killed during the September 11, 2001 attacks."
- Used in [[Dancing with the Stars (U.S. season 9)]] to state that "During rehearsal on September 28, Lacey Schwimmer "severely strained" her hip flexors and abductors. Her injuries required 3 weeks of physical therapy. She continued to dance on the show during her treatments."
- Used in the [[Brian Gazer]] BLP, along with primary court sources, to provide a detailed financial breakdown of Gazer's divorce settlement.
- Used in [[Suleman octuplets]] as a source for stating that the octuplets' grandmother has complained that "her daughter does not contribute toward housing or food costs".
- Used in the [[Brittany CoxXx]] BLP to state that 'Borat's producers first contacted [Stonie's Manager, David Forest] in June 2005, he tells Radar. "They wanted to find someone who would look 13 or 14 but was actually of legal age and would do frontal nudity," he recalls. Cortez immediately sprang to mind, he says, because "he's a small-framed boy but has a large organ." How large? "About eight inches, and thick."'
We have a policy about not spreading gossip, but I see little evidence that we adhere to it.
Andreas
--- On Fri, 4/2/11, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@yahoo.com wrote:
From: Andreas Kolbe jayen466@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Tabloid sources (was Wikipedia leadership}) To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Friday, 4 February, 2011, 13:25 --- On Fri, 4/2/11, wiki doc.wikipedia@ntlworld.com wrote:
From: wiki doc.wikipedia@ntlworld.com OK, let's take a case in point: Prem Rawat
Jimbo recently added into the lead "Rawat has often
been
termed a cult leader in popular press report, as well as
[[anti-cult]]
writings" - stating "This is, without a doubt, the most important thing
readers
need to know".
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prem_Rawat&diff=411493466&... 5705319
The citations he provided for the "popular press" were
from
"Brisbane Courier-Mail" and "The London Courier-Standard". Now, neither could be deemed "expert sources". If we want to label the chap
a
cultist, we'd want a neutral academic or some authority. Not the writings
of
journalists who tend to recycle, sensationalise, and do little research.
Anyone
who's been involved in a newstory that's been reported even in
quality
papers, knows that daily newscycle journalists do piss-poor
research,
dreadful fact-checking, and drastic oversimplifications. Having
said
that, Jimbo's addition is perfectly true, he's often been termed a
"cult
leader" in the popular press. The question is, is Wikipedia in the business of reporting what is "often said" or what is "reliably,
authoritively,
or neutrally said"? I guess I'm unsure. The other half of Jimbo's insertion concerns
"[[anti-cult]]
writings". Again, these sources are perfectly reliable as to
what
"anti-cult" people are saying. But they are also highly partisan sources.
The
sources in this case are "Bob Larson" and "Ron Rhodes" both
evangelical
Christians. (NB, the editor who pointed this out, has since been banned for
his
troubles: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php
title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&oldid=411950776#Momento)
Again, "what the critics say" isn't a bad thing to
include.
But perhaps the labels applied by Larson and Rhodes are given undue
weight,
when included so prominently in the lead.
The effect of this inclusion in the first paragraph,
is to
invite the reader to conclude "everyone says he's a cultist". That may
be
true, and "the most important thing readers need to know" - but is this
really
neutrality? Are we using sources appropriately? Again, I'm unsure.
As the freshly-banned user pointed out on Jimbo's talk page, Bob Larson is famous for doing "exorcisms on air":
Have a look, it's good fun. I am not sure if that is in any way, shape or form an encyclopedic source though.
Here is another example. The article on "New Village Leadership Academy" sources the following statement to this website:
Again, have a look at the site. An encyclopedic source?
This is the statement concerned that we have in our article:
---o0o---
Cales stated: "Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith, an admitted Scientologist, have opened this private school as a front for teaching the L. Ron Hubbard principles of 'Study Technology, his creation, and the school employs Scientologists. Our goal is to ultimately have the tax exemption status of the Scientology cult end, and the criminal deeds of Church leader David Miscaviage [sic] be exposed and prosecuted."[24]
---o0o---
Now, Jada Pinkett-Smith is on record as stating that she is not a Scientologist. Here is a quote:
---o0o---
Another subject she wants to set straight: persistent rumors that she and her husband are Scientologists, like their good friend Tom Cruise. She emphatically denies it, and she admits she thought it was a weird religion -
- until she met Cruise. "I'm not saying that I'm not a
Scientologist because I think something's wrong with Scientology -- I want to be really clear about that," Jada says. But, she adds, "In knowing Tom, I realize it is a religion just like other religions. Tom is happy. And he is one of the greatest men I know."
http://www.usaweekend.com/article/20090628/ENTERTAINMENT01/91026005/Jada-set...
---o0o---
Needless to say, Pinkett-Smith was listed for ages in our List of Scientologists, along with Chaka Khan, Gloria Gaynor and other non-Scientologists.
Andreas