Talk:L. Ron Hubbard

"held by Guinness World Records to be for the most..." - under Death and Legacy

Full sentence: "Hubbard is held by Guinness World Records to be for the most published author with 1,084 works, most translated book (70 languages for The Way to Happiness) and most audiobooks (185 as of April 2009)."

This appears to be out of date, if not simply false as even in 2009.

If considering works, Hubbard was unlikely to have had the most, even at his death. He definitely did not have the most translated book. Perhaps convert to say that Hubbard formerly held these world records (per the Guinness World Records), or additional context could be added, or the sentence struck completely.

For most published author:

Wikipedia itself notes Ryoki Inoue as being the most published author (also referencing the Guinness World Records), though it notes only 1075 works (regardless the conflict between the two seemingly needs to be corrected). Corín Tellado is noted as having over 4000 works published, with even the partial bibliography on Wikipedia extending over 1200 works. As it considers works rather than novels, Charles Hamilton is identified as having over 5000 short stories.

For most translated book:

Guinness World Records shows Le Petit Prince as the most translated single author, single book, and Wikipedia itself notes that The Little Prince and Adventures of Pinocchio as having the most translations and third most translations (with 300+ and 240-260 languages respectively).

These are single-author examples only, as there are multi-author works with even more translations (ex: the Bible (with 724 translations of the Protestant Canon) or the Quran (with 112 translations as of 2010)).

For most audiobooks:

It seems unlikely to be the most audiobooks as of today, but I can't find a more up to date reference for this, and the article notes the date. Spindrift Aura (talk) 04:48, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Most published works by one author

Most audiobooks published for one author 91.110.25.16 (talk) 22:50, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

The numbers are that high only because the Church of Scientology continues to revise and republish the same books and tapes over and over again. Every audio lecture was released on reel-to-reel tapes, then cassette tapes, then CDs, then DVDs. Hubbard never published any "audiobooks" during his lifetime. All of Hubbard's books and audiobooks have been SELF PUBLISHED by the Church of Scientology with at least 4 new revisions of everything having been made after Hubbard's death. So no matter how Scientology got Guinness to recognize the numbers they assuredly provided, the results are still skewed and worthless. Hubbard never wrote 1,084 books. Grorp (talk) 01:32, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

"Discovery" of sabotage in quotations

The subtitle for his military history section implies that his discovery of attempted sabotage was falsified/planted himself due to being in quotes, but nothing in the body of the article suggests that 215.67.148.5 (talk) 13:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done Excellent point, I've added quotes from Nibbs and competing opinion from Owens, replaced scare quotes with a question mark at the end of heading Feoffer (talk) 05:08, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

To-do list

• Hubbard learning of upcoming commitment prompting kidnapping  Done
• Consolidate stories of religion for money  Done
• Emeter  Done
• Interaction with D.C. psychiatrists Done
• Letter from Polly to Sara Done
• grab the contemporary source about Hubbard discovering gold on Grubb farm.  Done
• Racetrack Kools theory  Done
• Sara on him being surrounded by sycophants  Done
• Outed as occult practitioner  Done
• Track down quote on returning to excalibur - love or hate for man. - Try these: [1] [2] [3] [4] note by Grorp  Done THanks!!!
• Winter 'ought to have known better'. Done
• Telling Mayo that people blow because of ARC breaks not missed Overts/withholds  Done
• Hypnosis and swami career  Done
• Track down quote from Nibs "What my father was really good what destroying people" Done
• Massive attention needed to sara divorce, make own era section? Done
• R2-45 Done
• Commented out "Scientology biographies" for now  Done
• R2-45 order in Sea Org era Done
• only earned $100?  Done
• Legacy: Hubbard in Nation of Islam  Done
• Document response to Shrine debacle outside auditorium  Done
• Barbara Klowden  Done
• Gardner statement: Craze has fizzled  Done
• Calling for Mayo after injury  Done
• In popular culture  Done
  • Simpsons, Strange Angel  Done
• Trimed non-essential blockquotes (keeping Walnut Lodge, Excalibur, some Affirmations, Request for Treatment, Dr Center, NulAs, Psych Denunciation )  Done
• Fixed reintroduced MOSBACKREF issues  Done
• Diabetes and cancer cures in Dianetics 1950  Done
• Widespread clerical collars were much later,Scientology cross  Done
• Increasing authoritarianism Done
• summarize start of public anti-psychiatry  Done
• Massive improvements needed to early pulp fiction -- currently just a recitation  Done
• John McMaster Done
• Expand APA denunciation,  Done not really a denunciation after all, all things considered
• "Lonnie", twelve year old canadian boy locked in chain locker and subjected to introspection rundown, went psychotic, offloaded in Morocco discussed by Franks but lots of people talk about it  Done H.E. gives different name and age, better provenance use that. In future sub-article, go into more details.
• improve written works of l. ron hubbard page  Done
• Add comments about Hubbard's prolific writing style  Done
• Roommate interview: George Bernard Shaw perfect cranium story and polar bear story  Done
• Pseudobiography of L. Ron Hubbard  Done
• From fiction to autobiography: Done
• Affirmations: you know which are lies, real stories good enough  Done
• Split bio into subarticles Done
• --
• --

• Better public domain picture of subject?
• Resolve uncertainty about first marriage narrative -- miscarriage?
• Hubbard narrative of Polly as humanly glider guardian angel
• Can we find a good pic of a 1930s dentist office, perhaps with dentist and patient.
• Track down lead from llywrch: "Someone had come to Hubbard's front door , begging to read Excalibur; Hubbard managed to get rid of the stranger, then after the door closed he laughed & said, "One of these days I'll need to actually write the darned thing."
• massive trimming/summarizing of Scientology section
• kidnapping students during phoenix era
• pushing peanuts with nose till bloody on ship
• When does Hubbard first start talking about 75 million years ago?
• When did he mention 75 million years ago and then say he was only joking? PDC I think
• relationship with Nibs
• When did Hubbard personally do the purif? Before or after Narconon?
• Hubbard in South Africa
• Filming
• Person aboard ship that Ron gave book to, later heard Ron repeat stories from it
• Legacy: Scholars on linkage between mental illness and NRMs
• --
• Curate images
• Rescue and fix refs
• Add refs to all unrefed statements
• Summarize subarticles and discuss themes
• Decide what to do with In Scientology section
  • Estimate of assets? Other measures of success?
  • Portraits at orgs and events (My Scientology Movie)
  • LRH Reincarnation? (is this even a thing outside of South Park?)
• Trim lede
• Expand todo list

• Wikipedia needs a better article on "swami" in 20th-century western entertainment.
• Wikipedia needs a better article on Magical worldview.
• Wikipedia needs an article on ice/cold water therapy in 20th-century psychiatry.

Feoffer (talk) 02:45, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Feoffer, I saw in a recent edit summary that you're looking for an RS assessment of Hubbard's fiction. I think this is a top-quality source -- the SFE is the most authoritative science fiction reference work. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:49, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

That's exactly the source I needed! Thank you!!! Feoffer (talk) 21:13, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Edit conflicts

@Feoffer: I would really like you to put a banner at the top of the page during the chunk of time you are working on the article, such as Template:In use. I'd noticed you hadn't edited in hours, so I sat down to clean up all the Wright citations, and just before clicking "Publish changes" I checked. You had just made 5 edits in the time I was editing the file. Needless to say, I didn't publish my changes, but it was a waste of my work. Please add a banner while you're doing these major edits and remove it when you are done. Thank you. Grorp (talk) 00:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry!! Please, in future, just publish your changes over mine in situations like this, so your improvements won't be lost! Literally, when you see the Edit conflict, just copy everything in the "your text" box into the article box without spending a second thought about it. I'll be happy to resolve the edit conflicts and incorporate your fixes into my revisions! (And of course, I'll also try to remember add the in-use banner as you request.)

Do you have any ideas for the Military subheadings? Per SilkTork, the current subheadings might sound a little "this happened, then this happened, then this happened". Feoffer (talk) 00:40, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Commented out section is missing an end code

@Feoffer: FYI, the commented out section which immediately follows "Each franchise holder was required to pay ten percent of income to Hubbard's central organization" doesn't have any end code (and therefore ends with the end of the following commented out section). I couldn't identify or guess where the end code should go, so I'm just letting you know so you can put in an appropriate end code. Grorp (talk) 07:50, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

MartinPoulter got to it before I had a chance! Thanks! Feoffer (talk) 20:52, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Doing an "Inset map" on Wikipedia?

L._Ron_Hubbard#Hiding_in_California features two maps of Hubbards various hideouts -- one nationwide with another map of Southern California. Ideally these should be visually linked somehow, but presently they're rendered as two separate, unlinked maps. Does anyone have a solution? (short of rasterizing the entire thing)? Feoffer (talk) 20:52, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Feedback before going forward

For reference:

• Current
• Article two months ago
• 2011 version that was promoted to FA

The article come a long way since June, but also developed problems along the way. The current version of bio is far too lengthy and detailed, uses historical quotes instead of summaries. Simultaneously, the post-1953 sections are somewhat barebones at this point. I think Pop Culture and Bibliography are mostly good. The entire article needs a close reading to remove unnecessary detail, and to reduce the amount and length of the quotes.

Before shunting off excess detail into biographical subarticles, is there anything we're "missing"? There's lots of things that are in the article that shouldn't be -- is there anything in particular that's NOT in the article that SHOULD be. Feoffer (talk) 01:39, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Feoffer: As I said before your changes look great so far. In the section "In the Dianetics era", or perhaps in "Pivot to Scientology", it would be good to include some material about the wider range of sources Hubbard was getting his ideas from, particularly Crowley's writings but also elsewhere. Currently we cite Christensen, who focuses on Freudian influence. There's articles by Jon Atack and Hugh Urban which cover some of the other sources Hubbard was drawing from: Atack, Urban 1, Urban 2. Message on my talk if access is an issue.

In a similar vein, we might include a brief summary of the reviews by more prominent individuals on the initial publication of DMSMH. For example, the psychologist and public intellectual Erich Fromm reviewed it in The New York Herald Book Review. Cambial — foliar❧ 19:30, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions! I've added Fromm's reaction -- how could I have missed having an important psychologist's feedback. I've also added a "Sources and Doctrines" section summarizing the Atack and Urban refs you provided! Good call, give a shout if you see any other opportunities for improvement Feoffer (talk) 00:36, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Too many pictures?

I feel that there are too many pictures on this page, especially of vaguely related or irrelevant images. It's just a constant stream of pictures on right side, several of which are not necessary. Specifically, these are the ones I think could be removed without detracting too much from the article:

• Dentist office
• Jack Parsons (maybe)
• Bay Head cottage (or at least move part of the excessively long caption into the main article)
• Sara Northrup custody photo (there is a clearer photo of Sara's face earlier in the article)
• Rhodesia map
• Volcano
• Signorelli devil painting
• Purple Heart medal
• SNL parody comparison (maybe)

I'd like to know what thoughts other users have on this matter. Legocity264 (talk) 06:14, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

I agree that these are excessive or irrelevant: Dentist, Parsons, custody, Rhodesia map, Signorelli. I like the Purple Heart and the parody images, and would like to see them stay. Bay Head and volcano were probably part of a reaction to remove some of the quotations that another editor asserted were 'excessive' in this article. Those two pictures could definitely go. If the quotes are desirable, then put them back into the paragraphs. Grorp (talk) 06:49, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

The article is in desperate need of more historic photos of Hubbard. There are QUITE a lot of photos of him, even prior to 1926, and US Fair Use would allow them into the article, but Wikipedia's fair use policy is so strict, I'm not sure if it's possible to include multiple fair use photos of the subject in the article.

I think Volcano, Purple Heart, and SNL parody are high quality. I feel we should have _some_ AntiChrist imagery, and while Signorelli isn't ideal (I'd prefer something from Hubbard's era, but copyright), it does the job.

Dentist Office, Parsons, Bay Head, Custody Hearing, and Rhodesia map are substandard images, chosen out of a lack of good alternatives. The dentist office is a museum recreation that fails to evoke the other-worldly experience Hubbard describes having during his altered state of conscious. Parsons was an important figure, but this pic is of him as an expert witness not an occult practitioner. The custody hearing seems like a staged PR photo to me. But we DO need images, and they're relevant if low-quality. What might we replace them with??? Feoffer (talk) 10:03, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

You could move these pictures to a gallery section. --Devokewater 10:01, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2023

typo Carl Jung instead Cark Jung 2A02:908:13D0:2B40:D0DF:D89B:5FC:D8B7 (talk) 19:26, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done thanks for hte suggestion! Feoffer (talk) 20:57, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Typo

In late-1950, Hubbard began an affair with employee Barbara Klowden, prompting Sara to start he own affair with Miles Hollister.

Should be "her own affair with Miles Hollister." Smorss2011 (talk) 18:15, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for catching it! Feoffer (talk) 20:58, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Soup cans

@Herostratus: To answer your question, yes, soup cans—any and all. They were originally soup cans.

And I don't know whether it was Jim or whether it was me, but somebody thought of soup cans. By increasing the amount of electrode area we might be able to increase the mental read. And so we went out in the kitchen – and I think V8 vegetable juice or something like that; and we got awful tired of that stuff after a while, you know. Because, you know, American Can Company won't sell you just plain tin cans. You've got to go out and... If they do sell you tin cans, they cost as much as a can of soup anyhow, and you can't get them. For some reason or other these big can companies won't sell you cans. Sears and Roebuck at one time had home-canning outfits, and I hoped to be able to get spare cans from them, but we've never been able to run down just plain cans! We've always been going to the grocery store and buying a couple of new brands of vegetable juice or orange juice or something of the sort that were the right size, bringing them home, drinking the stuff down and washing them all out and hooking them onto the meter. Some day somebody is going to permanently paint cans, you know, and they won't have paper on them, and we'll be sunk. [laughter] They don't realize – they don't realize what scientific advance is hanging on this whim. Hey! We'd be out of business at once.

— L. Ron Hubbard, The E-meter : A lecture given on 19 July 1962

Grorp (talk) 03:18, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

@Herostratus: If you have other suggestions for ways the article can be improved, we need more eyes. Our recent Good Article reviewer had lots of good suggestions that we implemented, but we're a bit at a loss for a way to keep improving. Feedback greatly welcomed. Feoffer (talk) 05:14, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't have any other concrete suggestions at this time, no. I did notice other some problematical passages tho. A few. It's a very good article. Sorry about being snarky. It is a very difficult subject to write about, and kudos and thanks to the editors who took it upon themselves to do so. It's difficult because the guy was a blackguard apparently, and his church or movement or whatever also sucks. I think that, and you all think that, because of course we do.

Still, we always want the reader to come away with no idea of how we feel about the guy. Let the reader decide what she thinks with no prompting from us. For instance, I recently redacted a lot of an overly-negative section in Jim Jordan. I despise Jim Jordan, but fair's fair.

Hubbard's dead, so we don't have to worry about his feelings or reputation or BLP. But still...

It's just, there's lots of little stuff, and sort of a general tone... "The basic content of Dianetics was a rehash of Psychoanalysis"... we probably wouldn't use that terminology for a guy we liked. "based on" or "similar to" or "a modification of" or something other than "rehash". I don't know if it's a quote, but even if it is, I'm sure there are also quotes available about how it was a "advancement of Psychoanalysis" or something.

I dunno. The guy was an extremely successful person, his book must have been reasonably good to have started all this off, a bunch of people think highly of him apparently... Sure Xenu is made up, but so is the Mormon histories...

The thing about the soup cans is, they were hollow metal cylinders. That is what matters, not what they might have been repurposed from. Lots of things are pretty jury-rigged in prototype. The Apple I had a wooden case. I'm sure the production models used tin rolled into a cylinder or something, soon enough. So why say "soup cans"? It is an actual fact, but maybe a cherry-picked one. If I was getting the vibe "ingenious use of available materials" that'd be one thing, but within the context of the article it feels more like "what a joke".

I dunno. If the reader doesn't form the impression "what an psycho asshole charlatan" then we probably haven't described him accurately, and we don't want to prevent the reader from forming that (accurate, I guess) impression. It's a hard line to walk. Herostratus (talk) 07:10, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough, on the overall general impression and advice. I'd like to add however that people were using soup cans for decades. Each person being audited had to have just the right size of cans that fit their hands. The emeters were sold without cans, or sometimes just one pair of cans, so people were always collecting food cans to supplement their "collection" of different can sizes. Somewhere in the 1990s (I think that was the time frame) the Church of Scientology started offering "sets" of cans, maybe 5 or 6 pairs of cans in different sizes, but the cost of the set became quite expensive. Using food cans was neither unusual nor frowned upon. The "right size" was more important than the provenance of the cans. As long as they were clean, didn't have any sharp edges, and conducted properly, they were acceptable. Somewhere around the time of the Mark VII emeter, the connectors were changed from alligator clips to a push-in style, and store-bought cans went out of favor. The Mark VI still used alligator clips. Grorp (talk) 07:39, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Huh. Well butter my buns and call me a biscuit. Soup cans. OK. I figured not, cos it seems that even the first production e-meters had to be made, wired up and soldered together on a breadboard or whatever (granted it was a quite simple circuit I guess), the dials attached, power supply, possibly a cabinet made (could have been from Radio Shack tho), and screwed together or whatever. I figured if you're going to that, you'd roll up a strip of tin to make your cylinders. But I guess not. OK. Well. Sorry. Herostratus (talk) 03:39, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

I really wanna thank you for your impressions -- I reworded the specific part you cited as biased verbiage ("Rehash of Psychoanalysis"). It's easy to see that that's biased once someone points it out to us, but it's not always easy to see your own blind spots without the aid of others.

Joseph Smith is a perfect analogy, and I would like this article to achieve similar quality, where it doesn't feel unduly "anti-Smith". It's hard needle to thread, but it can be done, and anything else you see that sticks out biases verbiage, please let us know. We have an open peer review request and need all the feedback we can get. Feoffer (talk) 05:09, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Alright. It really is quite a good article as it stands. Herostratus (talk) 00:44, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Reference 122 [at time of posting]

This reference does not link to a source. A source for the claim that Jung had used an electropsychometer/e-meter "famously" is neither found on Jung's Wikipedia page nor the page for the 'electropsychometer/e-meter', so a link to some source is warranted. Eli.stroud (talk) 22:01, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

This is the citation which says simply "Jung 1906". I tried to identify what it is supposed to be, but it looks like there are several letters by Jung in 1906. This citation was added by Feoffer in this edit. @Feoffer: maybe you can recall, and can pad out that citation. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 01:29, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping! Added the full 1906/7 source and also added Urban's 2011 citation of Jung. Feoffer (talk) 02:52, 11 October 2023 (UTC)