Talk:Scientology and homosexuality#Requested move 26 March 2024

{{reply|Pastelitodepapa}} I don't think that the Aled Thomas thesis is considered a reliable source. See WP:SCHOLARSHIP. In my opinion, I don't consider Thomas a reliable source for Scientology, and this particular source is very weak for what you're trying to use it for.

By the way, you used a link to ProQuest, but the copy at ProQuest is just 24 pages and yet you mention page numbers in the 120's. [https://oro.open.ac.uk/61691/ This one] is over 300 pages and labelled as "final copy". However, since the thesis is always bundled with other sources, it can probably be dropped altogether.

And please get rid of those bundled citations because they are more confusing than just seeing them in the text.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 07:18, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

:I've removed the Thomas thesis in favor of the remaining sources for when it was used. I used the nested reference template to decrease some visual clutter per WP:CITEMERGE and WP:INLINECLUTTER. If you continue to feel strongly about it you can always unbundle them. Pastelitodepapa (talk) 16:55, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

My good faith recent addition of a relevant and representative lead image to help improve the article which currently has no images was removed. I propose to keep the lead image per reasons outlined on MOS:LEADIMAGE:

• It "give[s] readers visual confirmation that they've arrived at the right page."
• It is an "appropriate representations of the topic".
• It is the "type of image used for similar purposes in high-quality reference works".
• Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED.
• It is "relevant in the topic's context" visually representing the intersection of homosexuality and Scientology by combining the two recognized symbols for each.

I would like to WP:DISCUSSCONSENSUS.

Here are some examples of reputably published academic works using art showing combined or side-by-side symbols to artistically represent the intersection of the book's topics using well known symbols from each:

• [https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Flag_and_the_Cross/4vJbEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0 The Flag and the Cross] (Oxford University Press)
• [https://www.google.com/books/edition/Theology_of_Money/ox7YMAL0qbgC?hl=en&gbpv=0 Theology of Money] (Duke University Press)
• [https://www.google.com/books/edition/Baptized_in_Blood/lk84N6NnwO0C?hl=en&gbpv=0 Baptized in Blood] (University of Georgia Press)
• [https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Market_as_God/e6nrDAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0 The Market as God] (Harvard University Press)
• [https://www.google.com/books/edition/Religion_and_Politics_in_Comparative_Per/K8jLCgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0 Religion and Politics in Comparative Perspective] (Cambridge University Press)

Here are examples of a Wikipedia pages using a similar symbolic concept in a lead image used elsewhere on Wikipedia: Template:LGBT Mormon topics, Baháʼí views on homosexuality, Homosexuality and religion, Jewish views on homosexuality, Christianity and homosexuality, and Religion and LGBTQ people, and [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Time_Magazine_cover_April_13,_2015.webp Time magazine].

Here are some similar examples specific to Scientology elsewhere on the web representing the intersection between homosexuality and Scientology: [https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/2286889/church-scientology-lgbtq.png?w%3D1280%26h%3D720%26q%3D88%26f%3D6570f2e6565049b47bc7be1d84c1cd2e&tbnid=c8AZ5-6noBolmM&vet=1&imgrefurl=https://www.newsweek.com/scientology-church-gay-miscavige-leah-remini-1829857&docid=64GIYB_sXxsiFM&w=1280&h=720&itg=1&source=sh/x/im/m1/1&kgs=55601e50748c510c Newsweek magazine], [https://www.deviantart.com/lovemystarfire/art/LGBT-Scientology-Symbol-446732797 An artist's page], [https://www.elle.com/culture/a23025748/scientology-michelle-leclair-interview/ Elle magazine].

Thoughts on maintaining the image? Thank you in advance for a thoughtful discussion. Pastelitodepapa (talk) 22:15, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

:The user who removed it saying it was original research. The illustration is not research, nor is it something that "reaches or implies a conclusion not stated by the sources" per WP:OR. It's merely a symbolic depiction of the discussion of homosexuality in Scientology. Rainbow flags are a symbol for homosexuality and the Scientology cross is a symbol for Scientology. Putting them together doesn't imply any conclusion beyond Scientology has discussed homosexuality, and media sources have discussed Scientology's views on homosexuality. There are sources for that in the article and I can link a ton of those here (here are some ones that use the rainbow along with Scientology symbols: [https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/2286889/church-scientology-lgbtq.png?w%3D1280%26h%3D720%26q%3D88%26f%3D6570f2e6565049b47bc7be1d84c1cd2e&tbnid=c8AZ5-6noBolmM&vet=1&imgrefurl=https://www.newsweek.com/scientology-church-gay-miscavige-leah-remini-1829857&docid=64GIYB_sXxsiFM&w=1280&h=720&itg=1&source=sh/x/im/m1/1&kgs=55601e50748c510c Newsweek], [https://www.deviantart.com/lovemystarfire/art/LGBT-Scientology-Symbol-446732797 artist's page], [https://www.elle.com/culture/a23025748/scientology-michelle-leclair-interview/ Elle magazine]). The illustration is neutral and not research. Here are other similar examples from Wikimedia that others have made illustrating the intersection of homosexuality and an organization/religion:

:* :File:The symbols of the different big world religions on a rainbow - flag at Queer Easter.jpg

:* :File:Rainbow flag with icons of world religions.svg

:* :File:Abc1069.png

:* :File:WiR Pride June 2021.png

:* :File:Tęczowe Godło Polski; Polish Rainbow Coat of Arms 01.pdf

:* :File:Mir Veln Zey Iberlebn (Gay Pride Colors).svg

:* :File:SLC Temple Rainbow Flag.jpg

:* :File:Buddhist rainbow flag.svg

:* :File:Gay sigil of baphomet.png

:* :File:Queer Pagan Flag.svg

:By that user's logic those are all "research" that should be deleted. Pastelitodepapa (talk) 07:42, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

:We have this discussion split between three pages. OR is maybe not the right word but this is a low quality image that gives an exceedingly inaccurate representation of this article. I concur with Grorp that it should not be used. PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

::Agree with you and Grorp, image is not appropriate. Zenomonoz (talk) 07:36, 28 February 2025 (UTC)