Just to make sure, I didn't mean just to name drop it once and keep the rest the same, but that after name dropping, the joke ends, and the trope is explained in full without reservations about mentioning scientology, and explaining that is about Writing Around Trademarks.
Edited by ElBuenCuate on Jun 19th 2019 at 1:41:17 PM
Clear, Concise, Witty in that order.
Making it clear that the trope is about parodies of Scientology is the #1 goal of the page. If we have to say "Scientology" once to make that point, or fifteen times should make no difference.
Going out of our way to write a description to intentionally use (or not use) the word "Scientology" because it's a funny joke detracts from the objective purpose of the description.
Yes. Like how Wikipedia's page on ''Gadsby once didn't use the letter "e", just like the novel itself. The joke was removed because it made the article difficult to understand - it couldn't say the name of the book's author (Ernest Vincent Wright), couldn't say it was a novel, and couldn't even say that the novel didn't have the letter e, which was what made it notable in the first place! Our own page on the novel has a self-demonstrating version separate from the main article, so that readers who haven't heard of it before know what they're reading about.
It's the exact same problem in this case. While we're not as serious as Wikipedia, we still shouldn't be needlessly confusing - Clear, Concise, Witty is a rule here, after all. If scrapping the joke completely is too much, drop it at the end of the description and in the examples, like others have said.
As for the Useful Notes page, here's why it was cut according to Permanent Red Link Club:
"UsefulNotes.Scientology: Even after being locked, the fighting didn't stop. Since it was the only Useful Notes page that doesn't help you understand anything on this wiki better, the page was deleted. Church of Happyology describes when people make up a ridiculous religion, and you don't even have to know anything about Scientology to get the joke, especially not when it's actually making fun of Scientology itself. Besides, if Scientology's in a work, you can always use Wikipedia to see how accurate it is."
If a work features dinosaurs, you can also use Wikipedia to see how accurate it is, but our page on them still exists. To be fair, dinosaurs aren't quite as controversial a topic as Scientology.
Edited by Lymantria on Jun 19th 2019 at 5:55:31 AM
Join the Five-Man Band cleanup project!Sandboxed here is a draft "removing the joke".
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. — H.L. MenckenI would suggest listing some common characteristics of this church, since every parody religion is not a parody of Scientology. Otherwise, the sandboxed description seems fine.
Edited by Fighteer on Jun 22nd 2019 at 8:20:48 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"What about just adding this to the beginning of the last paragraph of the current description, allowing us to both retain the joke and improve clarity:
Ah, but we jest. To be clear, this only covers parodies of the Church of Scientology. As such, it's a subtrope of Parody Religion.
"It's just a show; I should really just relax"It doesn't seem necessary to me. It is very obvious it is about parody. In fact, I was thinking that the word 'parody' might have been overstressed, as it is. Counting 'parodist', 'lampooning', and 'parody' together, there 5 mentions. In two paragraphs. Anyone still confused will not suddenly get it on the sixth mention.
Edited by eyebones on Jun 23rd 2019 at 4:01:26 AM
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. — H.L. MenckenOver the addition of a line? It seems like overkill. Let's streamline, a bit. The re-draft has been up for review for a while without any big demurrers. I'll go ahead and install it, and if anyone has a substantial problem with it, we can circle back.
edited to add
Sheesh, it is locked. How do we get an unlock these days?
Edited by eyebones on Jun 24th 2019 at 10:36:42 AM
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. — H.L. MenckenIt appears to genuinely be under mod lock.
It has an entry on Locked Pages
Edited by bitemytail on Jun 24th 2019 at 9:06:09 AM
Manually unlocked that page. The lock reason in the system was "People don\'t seem to get that the wor Scietnology is not WANTED IN THIS FUCKING ARTICLE.." for what it's worth.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanA Useful Notes page would be on-mission for us, given how often Scientology is referenced in media, but it would need to have a very tight writeup and be locked immediately after creation.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

I got a rock for Halloween.