Talk:David Miscavige
Add topicLatest comment: 14 years ago by Cirt in topic Cleanup
Note
[edit]Lede is from intro at article on en.wikipedia, w:David Miscavige. -- Cirt (talk) 00:27, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Cleanup
[edit]Please explain on the talk page, details of what needs to be done for the lede? :) Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 00:17, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- I actually did explain why I added the cleanup tag in the change history. My reasons were that the references needed to be removed (including the references section). Also, the intro is much longer than is the norm here. We generally only have a sentence or two (at most a single paragraph) as an intro, since if someone is interested in more, they can always view the corresponding wikipedia page. ~ UDScott 00:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- The info is contentious, and on a controversial topic. That is why there are references in the intro locally. Also, it is most helpful to provide a good deal of context for the reader with this sort of intro/lede. Perhaps you could suggest what you feel should be removed or trimmed down from the intro. -- Cirt (talk) 00:45, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- Sure. First, let me say that these references are valuable, but I don't believe they have a place here - they are better placed on the corresponding wikipedia page for this person (which the user can visit if they so choose). I would leave the intro with the following:
David Miscavige (born April 30, 1960) is the leader of the Church of Scientology and its many affiliated organizations, having assumed that role shortly after the death of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard in 1986. His formal title is Chairman of the Board of Religious Technology Center (RTC), a corporation that controls the trademarked names and symbols of Dianetics and Scientology.
~ UDScott 00:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)- Thank you! And,
Done! ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 01:07, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you! And,
- Sure. First, let me say that these references are valuable, but I don't believe they have a place here - they are better placed on the corresponding wikipedia page for this person (which the user can visit if they so choose). I would leave the intro with the following:
- The info is contentious, and on a controversial topic. That is why there are references in the intro locally. Also, it is most helpful to provide a good deal of context for the reader with this sort of intro/lede. Perhaps you could suggest what you feel should be removed or trimmed down from the intro. -- Cirt (talk) 00:45, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
