Revision as of 14:52, 7 July 2024 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,709 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:E-meter/Archive 2) (bot← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:00, 26 July 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,709 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:E-meter/Archive 2) (bot | ||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
{{reflist-talk}} | {{reflist-talk}} | ||
== Confusing == | |||
With what seems like earlier editors' attempts to ridicule the topic of the e-meter, this article has become more "what it is not", and fails to clearly describe "what it is". The article was (and should be) intended to describe the Scientology device (])—keep its title in mind. Though it could still mention "other similar devices" or "non-Scientology uses", one must keep in mind ]. | |||
I made some changes (rearranged sections) with the goal of an outline like this: | |||
* Lead (need rewriting) | |||
* Overview (keeping it brief, cover what is it, who uses it, how is it used, why it was invented) | |||
* History | |||
** Mathison (cover Mathison's invention) | |||
** Hubbard (cover Hubbard's association/participation with the invention or ongoing modifications) | |||
** Earlier use of potentially similar devices (as an aside, because none were part of the e-meter's invention) | |||
* Use in Scientology (put a little more detail than the overview of how it is used) | |||
* Technical description (put all the electronics/geeky stuff here) | |||
* Legal issues | |||
That last section titled "Scientology beliefs and theories" is mostly uncited, heavy on the quotes, and I'm not really sure what the purpose of it was. Other things of note: The constant use of "EDA" is odd, since all the sources called it a "galvanometer"; I suspect EDA is coming from the "what it is not" category of sources. The article is also heavy on quotes. | |||
<span style="text-shadow:#000 0em 0em 1em">]</span> 09:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Capitalization == | == Capitalization == |
Latest revision as of 15:00, 26 July 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the E-meter article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 6 months |
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
To add to article
To add to this article: at least a brief mention of the "floating needle" (F/N) phenomenon. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 17:26, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- Why? What is the connection to the E-meter and which reliable source makes that connection? --Hob Gadling (talk) 20:20, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- The floating needle is one of the needle reactions of the meter. It indicates a few things, but mainly it is "the" needle reaction that is required to manifest in order to end an auditing session. It is described in various books. I found this one today. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 10:54, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
References
- Harley, Gail M.; Kieffer, John (2009). "The Development and Reality of Auditing". In Lewis, James R. (ed.). Scientology. Oxford University Press. pp. 183–206. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331493.003.0010. ISBN 9780199852321. OL 16943235M.
Capitalization
The trademarked term is spelled "E-Meter". I thought that "e-meter" would be the general term as written, but no. Every Hubbard or Church of Scientology source, from very early to recent, seems to have capitalized it as "E-Meter". There are 104 instances of "e-meter" in the article, with varying capitalization. Perhaps we should standardize it to "E-Meter", unless it is used in a quote which capitalizes it differently. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 10:47, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Interesting source
I found this source today. Very interesting. Lots of photos. It looks like a composite of excerpts from many other sources. Doubtful it could be used as a citation (non-RS), but it might be useful for information... and then a more reliable source found.
▶ I am Grorp ◀ 11:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
A 'secular' or 'scientific' perspective is needed.
Whilst explaining Scientologist's perspective and understanding on the device is an important part of the article, as a Misplaced Pages article, it needs a 'secular' or 'scientific' section to this page too which I find is lacking. This is something that really needs to be expanded upon. 203.211.79.70 (talk) 12:06, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, the page is an over-detailed monstrosity in much need of simplifying/clarifying. Can you elaborate on what you mean by 'secular or scientific'? ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 20:45, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
- The article is all too credulous and seems to not achieve the balance that other fringle articles do when documenting quackery 66.41.165.13 (talk) 06:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- B-Class Scientology articles
- High-importance Scientology articles
- WikiProject Scientology articles
- B-Class Skepticism articles
- Low-importance Skepticism articles
- WikiProject Skepticism articles
- B-Class Alternative views articles
- Low-importance Alternative views articles
- WikiProject Alternative views articles
- Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press