Talk:Frank Hamilton Cushing

Citations needed
Citations to reliable sources are needed for much of the recently added content criticizing Cushing's work. Other content that does not appear to be controversial would benefit from sourcing, but the major issue is the content criticizing his work, some of which should be edited for tone, even if it can be supported by reliable sources. - Donald Albury 14:47, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Professional Controversy Section
The Professional Controversy section is written much differently than the rest of the article and seems highly opinionated, especially at the end where the writer says "we" multiple times. Not an expert on Cushing but that definitely isn't written right. J22M (talk) 17:00, 19 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I noticed this as well. The last sentence literally offers an opinion for the reader. 2600:6C51:717F:E879:C5FD:9DA2:4AD1:7F3D (talk) 01:03, 23 October 2023 (UTC)


 * The problem I saw was that much of the section was unsourced. While the behavior described was consistent with the reported norms of the era, it was not sourced. Even if we feel in our hearts that something is true, in Wikipedia we require that everything in an article be verifiable from reliable sources, and I think content about the character and reputation of a person, living or dead, needs in-text citations to reliable sources. I accordingly removed all of the unsourced content. - Donald Albury 12:50, 23 October 2023 (UTC)