Talk:Church of Scientology warns Wikileaks over documents

Active discussions
Articles for deletion
This page was previously nominated for deletion.

Please see prior discussion(s) before considering re-nomination:

This reminds me ofEdit

This reminds me of my friend Graeme telling me that the furry rodent in the plastic box was a "Syrian hamster". Didn't look Syrian to me... It didn't have mini sticks of dynamite strapped to its chest. --Brian McNeil / talk 23:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Brian, this is not what the "collaboration" page is for. Please use the opinion page for commentary. --ANonHubbard - (talk) 01:24, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Don't try and teach the crocodile how to swim. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

OREdit

I added the OR tag due to reliance on primary sources. I am going to go look for some other possible secondary sources. Cirt - (talk) 01:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Possible commentaryEdit

Threads to follow for possible commentary/snippets:

Both threads appear to contain comments from both critics of Scientology and supporters/Scientologists, or at least one Scientology supporter/Scientologist who goes by "Tom N" or "Tom Newton". Cirt - (talk) 06:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion requestEdit

There was a Deletion request which led to a discussion of whether or not to delete this article, and the result was "Speedy keep." - The discussion is here. Cirt - (talk) 07:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion request was reopened, and then later closed again with same result, "Speedy keep.". The discussion is here. Cirt - (talk) 00:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Digg effectEdit

I apologize to Wikileaks now for bringing down their servers because of digg.com. At 3:30 a.m. eastern time, Wikinews went on the front page of digg. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 08:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikinews article hits front page of Digg.com while undergoing Deletion requestEdit

This article hit the front page of Digg.com at 07:39 UTC (currently still at the front page with 601 Diggs) while in the midst of an ongoing deletion request at Wikinews:Deletion requests. Can anyone say Streisand effect? (Also posted to Wikinews:Water cooler/miscellaneous) I think that this is a most interesting first for Wikinews. Cirt - (talk) 09:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikinews articles that made front page of Digg.com
  1. "Chris Benoit mystery editor confesses: claims "terrible coincidence"" — Wikinews, June 29, 2007 - Digg.com link
  2. ""Anonymous" releases statements outlining "War on Scientology"" — Wikinews, January 23, 2008 - Digg.com link
  3. "Church of Scientology warns Wikileaks over documents" — Wikinews, April 7, 2008 - Digg.com link - also believed to be the first time that a Wikinews article made the front page of Digg.com, while also undergoing a Deletion request discussion. Cirt - (talk) 10:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Blog exposureEdit

Church of Scientology warns Wikileaks, World Student Press Agency - basically a mirror, but they added a neat subtitle: "Church flexes it’s muscles over leaked documents". Cirt - (talk) 15:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sources that came out about this, post this article's publishEdit

Listing sources that covered this news topic, post this article's publish, here below. Cirt - (talk) 07:28, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll quote a portion from this next latest source here below, because it is worth noting here, especially in light of the closed deletion discussion for this article:

It's been a busy week both here and abroad on the IT front with the Yahoo!-Microsoft stoush becoming surreal, Telecom New Zealand getting real and (our most popular story for the week) Wikileaks picking a fight with those scary Scientologists. [...] The other big story for us was the Church of Scientology threatening Wikileaks over the publication of secret church documents. Okay, it's a long bow to say this is IT, aside from the fact it involves a website and church lawyers themselves call the documents "confidential Advanced Technology". But you readers loved it nonetheless.

So according to m-net, their, quote, "most popular story for the week" was their piece on Scientology/Wikileaks (cited above from April 8) - and yet this Wikinews article beat both The Register and m-net to it - published April 7. Cirt - (talk) 10:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
We beat everyone to this story. Wikileaks gave us a heads up before the letter was even on their site. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 11:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The Register kinda ripped us off :( DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 10:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, maybe sorta take that as a compliment to your writing. Cirt - (talk) 10:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Came up in a news search, cites Wikinews (this article). Cirt - (talk) 05:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Scientology members would pass along that more than 600 pages of their most sacred (and secret) religious documents had been posted there too. [...] Even the case of posting Scientology's private information is a clear judgment call: Does the public stand to benefit from the outing of the organization's most closely guarded secrets? Who says?

An interesting report on this in the Los Angeles Times. Cirt - (talk) 09:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Mentions Wikinews and Wikimedia Foundation, related to a different article, as well as Wikileaks. Cirt (talk) 09:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Return to "Church of Scientology warns Wikileaks over documents" page.