This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Viewpoint?
editSeveral remarks in this seemed like they were designed to promote him, or used biased language ("tradition-friendly"?). Is it noteworthy that a traditionalist blogger liked his book? A claim he had written over 1400 articles was unsourced (original research). I removed these statements and put explanations for why. Chrysologus (talk) 05:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Chrysologus: the tone is indeed promotional at times, and the details sometimes look more like those you would find in a CV than in an encyclopedia notice. Veverve (talk) 02:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- I really concur here. Additionally, WP:Notability seems to be in question as well.
- Maximilian775 (talk) 05:26, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Untitled
editAppears to meet WP:AUTHOR now. Legacypac (talk) 12:17, 7 May 2018 (UTC)