User talk:Blooddraken
| This is Blooddraken's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
I will use this page for any questions about edits that need to be made. Others may also use this page to make suggestions and answer my questions.
In the subsection Authenticity of patter drills as Scientology Doctrine, in the Controversies section it states: "But, if they were theory drills, the drills would then violate HCO Policy Letter 13 May 1972, "Chinese School". Others have contended that the patter drills are done in accordance with TR-101, which is once a drill to improve a student auditor's ability to give auditing commands." "which is once a drill" is an obvious grammatical error in one of two ways. I would like to fix it but I don't know how. If TR-101 is a regulation that has been cancelled, either through supercedence or cancellation, then it should instead say "which WAS once a drill". However, if TR-101 is still in effect it should say "which IS a drill". Does anyone have any information regarding this? Blooddraken 18:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Saw your notice on Patter Drill page. TR-101 was never cancelled. Still fully valid (at least theoretically) this this day.
- http://www.algonet.se/~tourtel/interests/hubbard_vs_nwo2_gat2_drill-history.html#tr100
- There is an extensive study about all these things that I attempted to add as a link on both the pages Golden Age of Tech and Patter Drill, see history pages of these. However various are removing them for obvious erroneous reasons. If you wish to leave your responses about these, please do.--Olberon 12:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
double article[edit]
- have asked for some help Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#unsucessful_move_-_now_have_two_articles Earlypsychosis (talk) 23:11, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Spam[edit]
Do NOT post anymore spam on this page. I will delete it immediately. And yes, I consider the Meetup stuff spam. Don't post it again.