Talk:William S. Sadler

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the William S. Sadler article.

Article policies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles related to Chicago.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
William S. Sadler is within the scope of WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Seventh-day Adventist Church and Seventh-day Adventist Church-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.


Something about this strikes me as vaguely POV, but I don't know enough about the history of American psychology to say. It would be nice though if it had some kind of, preferrably non-Urantian, source for statements like "regarded by his colleagues as a professional researcher of considerable integrity", "considered one of the world's foremost authorities", etc. I did find a site on the chautauqua scene that stated he was known for exposing medical quackery and one on Adventism that said he was known as a physician. So it might all be legitimate, but it would just be nice to know where these accolades came from.--T. Anthony 08:51, 6 October 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Improvements

A few months ago I made some minor edits to this article to lessen POV. It was the first article on Wikipedia I edited. Current article is a great improvement, day and night type of change. Should it still be considered a stub?--Edivorce 16:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)