Talk:Asbestos controversy aboard Scientology ship Freewinds

Latest comment: 15 years ago by Cirt in topic Possible follow-up



All of the sources listed in the Sources subsection were used in this article. OR note - email from Lawrence Woodcraft was forwarded to Scoop. Cirt (talk) 07:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

OR tag also refers to primary source documents. Cirt (talk) 08:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply



Text of the email from Lawrence Woodcraft:


Date: Thu, May 15, 2008 at 6:17 PM Subject: Re: Contact from Wikinews

Dear Cirt

As promised on IM, I stand by everything I wrote in my 2001 affidavit.

I would also comment that if the Church of Scientology claims to have removed the blue asbestos, I just don't see how, it's everywhere. You would first have to remove all the pipes, plumbing, a/c ducts, electrical wiring etc. etc. just a maze of stuff. Also panelling as well, basically strip the ship back to a steel hull. Also blue asbestos is sprayed onto the outer walls and then covered in paint. It's in every nook and cranny.

Freewinds was build as a car ferry so it's to a higher fire resistant standard than a regular ship.

i suspect that they'll do a "clean up" and then have the air tested until it's "safe"

Also you can't just strip out the asbestos, which fire protects the steel walls and decks, you would have to replace it with new fire resistant insulation

Lawrence Woodcraft

Cirt (talk) 07:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply



Is glosslip really a source? they seem to regurgitate other sources, most of which you also list. Even their "exclusive" is a report on something in a newspaper. Glosslip seems to be a celebrity gossip blog. --SVTCobra 10:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes, GlossLip was used as a source. Though generally you are correct that it is a celebrity gossip blog, writer Dawn Olsen often does her own investigations. Cirt (talk) 10:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
Dawn Olsen does do a lot of her own work interviews and radio shows. I have spoken to her a few times. Her site maybe a gossip site, but IMO she is probably the best of those sites. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 10:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
Well no direct work, interview or otherwise, of Olsen's seems to have been used or cited. And if by "best" you mean fervently anti-Scientology, I may have to agree that GlossLip could top the category. Personally, I think it undermines the credibility of our stories to use a source like GlossLip, with the possible exception when it refers to an interview (which does not seem to be the case here). Cheers, --SVTCobra 00:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
Direct work by Olsen was used as a reference for this article, as I had already stated, above. Your opinion about her perspective is noted. Cirt (talk) 04:55, 17 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
And as already stated, I have no doubt as to the factual accuracy or reliability of the work and research and writing done by Dawn Olsen. I do not think that using her work or her writings as a reference damages the credibility of Wikinews in any way whatsoever. Cirt (talk) 05:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Linky linky


Listing stuff below. Cirt (talk) 18:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sources post publish


Listing here below. Cirt (talk) 09:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

And also sources I found after the article was published. Cirt (talk) 08:43, 20 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Possible follow-up


[1], [2] - Would need additional corroborating sources as these are not really satisfactory on their own. Cirt (talk) 01:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Cirt (talk) 21:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Return to "Asbestos controversy aboard Scientology ship Freewinds" page.