Misplaced Pages

Talk:Citizens Commission on Human Rights: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:48, 5 June 2015 editScottperry (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers13,571 edits →Efforts for psychiatric reform section is not balanced: tweak← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:26, 10 July 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,012,018 editsm Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)Tag: paws [2.2] 
(22 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}} {{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Psychology|class=C|importance=Mid}} {{WikiProject Psychology|class=C|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject California|class=B|la=yes|importance=Low|la-importance=low}} {{WikiProject California|la=yes|importance=Low|la-importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Scientology|class=B|importance=High}} {{WikiProject Scientology|importance=High}}
}} }}
{{Notaforum}} {{Not a forum}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|maxarchsize=100000
|maxarchivesize = 250K
|numberstart=2
|counter = 1
|minkeepthreads=4
|minthreadsleft = 1
|age=2160|<!--90 days-->
|algo = old(60d)
|archive = Talk:Citizens Commission on Human Rights/Archive %(counter)d |archiveprefix=Talk:Citizens Commission on Human Rights/Archive
|format= %%i
}}
{{archive box|search=yes| |header={{automatic archive navigator}}
* ] - December 2004 - March 2008
}} }}


== image and Controversies and criticisms... accomplishments to counter balance info? ==
== 9/11 conspiracy ==

i added an image that seemed relevant... protestors wearing CCHR shirts (a bit blurry but i am pretty sure that is correct)... please remove if it is not best to have on article though.


and... there is a section.... Controversies and criticisms .... why not add one about accomplishments ... or at least claimed accomplishments? this organization CCHR was founded by atheist psychiatrist ].....
Freedom magazine is apparently blacklisted by Misplaced Pages, so I could not add this source which describes in detail the vast psychiatric conspiracy, entitled "The Terror Doctors". I can't even put the link here. Speaking of which, does anyone know which event it was that Miscavige revealed this conspiracy, claiming (quite erroneously) that al-Qaeda is a direct descendant of the medieval ] who were reputed to use hashish to create suicidal martyrs and all that? I believe it was the New Year's Event, but not sure. If we can find a source for this, it would be great because the claims made by the church regarding the ] were disproven a long, long time ago, considering the idea of Muslim soldiers martyred in battle would ascend to heaven with 72 virgins for eternity was a fabrication invented by the Crusaders. Considering that not a single reliable source in Islam mentions any of this, and it's today only parroted by anti-Muslim activists, this would be good to detail in the article, preferably with reliable rebuttals. ] (]) 23:59, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


claimed accomplishments by CCHR:
== This page is in violation of WP:Due/ Undue policy ==


https://www.cchr.org/about-us/cchr-accomplishments.html#:~:text=When%20apartheid%20ended%2C%20CCHR%20presented,disclosing%20information%20about%20psychiatric%20abuse.
This page reads likde a promo piece practically taken straight from the literature of the CCHR itself. The majority view of RS on the CCHR is not to be found fully expressed on this page anywhere. I propose that in order for this page to be restored to compliance with ] and ], that this page be reverted back to an earlier edition/ version when it was in compliance with these two policies.
] (]) 18:22, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


https://www.cchrint.org/about-us/cchr-accomplishments/
== Efforts for psychiatric reform section is not balanced ==


disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Scientology. bias: I am a fan of CCHR, but I am not associated with CCHR in any direct way. I have read a lot of books by Thomas Szasz CCHR co-founder.
CCHR and Scientology has had both a positive and a negative impact on the way psychiatric treatment has been practiced. It is difficult to separate Scientology from CCHR in a discussion like this, as the CCHR's attitudes to psychiatry are identical to the Scientology Organization and attitudes of Scientologist people to psychiatry are influenced by CCHR material.


limitless peace... inner and outer peace to you. ] (]) 03:07, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
For simplicity, and to avoid discussions about whether it is a front group I will use the term Scientology to apply to the Scientology organization and CCHR.


== Psychiatry: An Industry of Death (merged to this article) ==
The Chelmsford Hospital success story is one of the examples of the positive. At the same time, the attitude of Scientology to psychiatry has also led to Scientologists not receiving treatment for mental illness.


I merged ] into this article. It is not a separate organization; is owned and operated by CCHR and is in the same building. It is more of an exhibit, not a museum (despite the name over the door). It is not notable on its own, which was clear from the sources in the article (mostly CCHR primary sources, a few "grand opening" coverage articles, some unnecessary celebrity name-dropping, and two heavy-hitting psych sources that didn't even mention CCHR or the exhibit. <span style="text-shadow:#000 0em 0em 1em">]</span> 06:30, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
This has lead to and been implicated in many deaths, most notably Jett Travolta and Lisa McPherson, both of whom were denied treatment on the basis of denial of well accepted psychiatric facts.


== Rollback ==
I think that a section that says Psychiatry vs. CCHR and Scientology which poses both the positive and negative aspects of the conflict would be appropriate.


{{reply|RichardRahlsSon}} Neither "big pharma PR machine" nor any editor gets to have their way with Misplaced Pages articles. All must follow policies.
This particular section reads like a promotional piece. Although my superficial examination and my knowledge of the Scientology organization lead me to believe that most of the facts here are accurate, it is certainly not balanced. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 02:33, 3 June 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


From your first 3 edits:
:I haven't reviewed the section closely, but from a quick cursory check of citations used, it appears to be very well sourced for the most part. It doesn't look like any primary sources are being used as most of the sources, if not all of them are sourced to legitimate (non-tabloid) news sources and the wording doesn't come across as promotional to me. The basic Misplaced Pages view on this can be summarized as "]". That basically means that article content must reflect, as closely as possible, material previously published in a ], rather than the opinions or interpretations of individual editors.


# I have fixed the "no source" issue.
:For example, you mention Jett Travolta. Take a look at this paragraph from the John Travolta article: . You'll notice there is no claim or statement blaming anyone or anything for his son's death. Why? Because the theory that Scientology or Scientology policies or his parents were somehow responsible for "denying" or "withholding" medication is not verifiable. It's absolute speculation. You can also look at this discussion: for an example of the complexity surrounding such matters and how they should be handled on Misplaced Pages.
# The "statement of opinion from a journalist" is published in a reliable source ''and'' is attributed to him with ] as required by Misplaced Pages.
# Szasz not being a scientologist is irrelevant to this article and can be found by clicking the link to ]. It certainly doesn't belong in the lead paragraph.


It seems from your choice of words in your edit summaries that you are extremely opinionated about this subject. You might want to read ] and ]. <span style="text-shadow:#000 0em 0em 1em">]</span> 05:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
:It's a similar situation over at the ] article. Regardless, neither Lisa McPherson nor Jett Travolta appear to have any connection, direct or otherwise, with CCHR and its anti-psychiatry campaigning. If there is a verifiable connection, then a reliable source would be needed to support the assertion.


:Your source you added fails to meet the minimum criteria for reliable sources.
:Regarding balance, there is already a section on controversies, which I've renamed as "Controversies and criticisms" that certainly could use expansion.
:Specifically it cannot be traced to a specific author, cannot be verified by the general public, and you linked to an article published before the internet, reposted on the wayback machine with zero context to support your claims sufficiently.
:Lastly on the topic of your questionable source, it has no authenticity or sources itself. It is merely another chunk of text on the internet buttressing your views.
:I have not injected any "strong opinions" on the subject, I've merely removed someone elses strongly opinionated statements based on flimsy sources which do not meet the minimum qualifying standards for Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 06:09, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
:RE:2. A reliable sources opinion is not a fact. It does not meet Wikipedias qualifications to be cited as a source, and opinions do not belong on Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 06:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
:RE:3. If his not being a Scientologist and distancing himself from the church of Scientology isn't relevant, then that also means your opinionated sources do not belong on the page.
:However, your claim is incorrect. The background of the founder and his dissociation with the church of scientology lends him credibility. Something which readers need to know if they are to understand the context and origins of the organization. ] (]) 06:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
:You might want to read the things you cite yourself as they support my actions:
:"This is because we only report information that is verifiable using reliable sources, and we base articles on secondary and independent sources, giving appropriate weight to the balance of informed opinion. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it."
:Please stop adding unverifiable sources and polemic quotes to Misplaced Pages followed by accusing editors of your own misconduct. ] (]) 06:31, 1 April 2024 (UTC)


:: The ] dictates that you should not re-revert, but should discuss on the talk page (or continue to discuss). Repeated reverting leads to ] which can get you banned or blocked. ] are for ''brief'' comments about your edits, not lengthy objections, which belong on talk pages. Four of your recent edit summaries were truncated (left incomplete). Please put your position or arguments on the talk page in order to come to a consensus with other editors (not just me). You are also expected ] to other editors, even when you disagree with them. <span style="text-shadow:#000 0em 0em 1em">]</span> 06:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
:My advice would be to open up a "]" and have other editors chime in and see if others agree that the article is promotional or biased in favor of the subject. ] (]) 09:04, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
:::My edit summaries were added to the talk page beforehand.
::Laval, I see no need to open an RFC for this topic. You yourself have not denied that the article is in violation of WP:Due/ Undue. Currently the article is 90% positive, and 10% negative. In order to properly reflect the balance of RS, this ratio needs to be reversed. Merely renaming the "Controversy" section to the "Controversy and criticism" section in no way reverses that balance. Unless you take it upon yourself to start an RFC on this, I will soon do the necessary work needed to reverse this balance as needed. If you do start an RFC on this, while it may buy a day or two for the current article, I still don't see how such an RFC could allow this article to continue in its flagrant violation of WP:Due/ Undue policy. Thanks, ] (]) 04:46, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
:::I would kindly remind you that falsely accusing others of your own misconduct is in fact uncivil. Being called out for violating rules and standards is however not uncivil.
:::Please stop. ] (]) 07:08, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:26, 10 July 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Citizens Commission on Human Rights article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconPsychology C‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
CThis article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconCalifornia: Los Angeles Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force (assessed as Low-importance).
WikiProject iconScientology High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is supported by WikiProject Scientology, a collaborative effort to help develop and improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of Scientology. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on Scientology-related topics. See WikiProject Scientology and Misplaced Pages:Contributing FAQ.ScientologyWikipedia:WikiProject ScientologyTemplate:WikiProject ScientologyScientology
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Citizens Commission on Human Rights. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Citizens Commission on Human Rights at the Reference desk.


image and Controversies and criticisms... accomplishments to counter balance info?

i added an image that seemed relevant... protestors wearing CCHR shirts (a bit blurry but i am pretty sure that is correct)... please remove if it is not best to have on article though.

and... there is a section.... Controversies and criticisms .... why not add one about accomplishments ... or at least claimed accomplishments? this organization CCHR was founded by atheist psychiatrist Thomas Szasz.....

claimed accomplishments by CCHR:

https://www.cchr.org/about-us/cchr-accomplishments.html#:~:text=When%20apartheid%20ended%2C%20CCHR%20presented,disclosing%20information%20about%20psychiatric%20abuse.

https://www.cchrint.org/about-us/cchr-accomplishments/

disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Scientology. bias: I am a fan of CCHR, but I am not associated with CCHR in any direct way. I have read a lot of books by Thomas Szasz CCHR co-founder.

limitless peace... inner and outer peace to you. Michael Ten (talk) 03:07, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Psychiatry: An Industry of Death (merged to this article)

I merged Psychiatry: An Industry of Death into this article. It is not a separate organization; is owned and operated by CCHR and is in the same building. It is more of an exhibit, not a museum (despite the name over the door). It is not notable on its own, which was clear from the sources in the article (mostly CCHR primary sources, a few "grand opening" coverage articles, some unnecessary celebrity name-dropping, and two heavy-hitting psych sources that didn't even mention CCHR or the exhibit.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 06:30, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Rollback

@RichardRahlsSon: Neither "big pharma PR machine" nor any editor gets to have their way with Misplaced Pages articles. All must follow policies.

From your first 3 edits:

  1. I have fixed the "no source" issue.
  2. The "statement of opinion from a journalist" is published in a reliable source and is attributed to him with in-text attribution as required by Misplaced Pages.
  3. Szasz not being a scientologist is irrelevant to this article and can be found by clicking the link to Thomas Szasz. It certainly doesn't belong in the lead paragraph.

It seems from your choice of words in your edit summaries that you are extremely opinionated about this subject. You might want to read WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and WP:PODIUM.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 05:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Your source you added fails to meet the minimum criteria for reliable sources.
Specifically it cannot be traced to a specific author, cannot be verified by the general public, and you linked to an article published before the internet, reposted on the wayback machine with zero context to support your claims sufficiently.
Lastly on the topic of your questionable source, it has no authenticity or sources itself. It is merely another chunk of text on the internet buttressing your views.
I have not injected any "strong opinions" on the subject, I've merely removed someone elses strongly opinionated statements based on flimsy sources which do not meet the minimum qualifying standards for Misplaced Pages. 73.169.83.170 (talk) 06:09, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
RE:2. A reliable sources opinion is not a fact. It does not meet Wikipedias qualifications to be cited as a source, and opinions do not belong on Misplaced Pages. 73.169.83.170 (talk) 06:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
RE:3. If his not being a Scientologist and distancing himself from the church of Scientology isn't relevant, then that also means your opinionated sources do not belong on the page.
However, your claim is incorrect. The background of the founder and his dissociation with the church of scientology lends him credibility. Something which readers need to know if they are to understand the context and origins of the organization. 73.169.83.170 (talk) 06:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
You might want to read the things you cite yourself as they support my actions:
"This is because we only report information that is verifiable using reliable sources, and we base articles on secondary and independent sources, giving appropriate weight to the balance of informed opinion. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it."
Please stop adding unverifiable sources and polemic quotes to Misplaced Pages followed by accusing editors of your own misconduct. RichardRahlsSon (talk) 06:31, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
The WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle dictates that you should not re-revert, but should discuss on the talk page (or continue to discuss). Repeated reverting leads to WP:Edit warring which can get you banned or blocked. Edit summaries are for brief comments about your edits, not lengthy objections, which belong on talk pages. Four of your recent edit summaries were truncated (left incomplete). Please put your position or arguments on the talk page in order to come to a consensus with other editors (not just me). You are also expected to be civil to other editors, even when you disagree with them.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 06:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
My edit summaries were added to the talk page beforehand.
I would kindly remind you that falsely accusing others of your own misconduct is in fact uncivil. Being called out for violating rules and standards is however not uncivil.
Please stop. RichardRahlsSon (talk) 07:08, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Categories: