Talk:Frank Lazarus

Guadalupe Art Print
The changes added on 22 March 2011 by Defensor1956, consist of two sentences.

The first is a neutral statement of fact, supported by two references.

The second sentence states: “Welcomed at first as a major fundraiser and organizer, Dr. Lazarus slowly lost popularity among students, faculty, and alumni, especially following his involvement in the Guadalupe Art Print Scandal.[11] [12]”

The first reference is a letter to the student newspaper, which does help support the fact that some (a few? many?) students were upset about the display of the artwork. However, the second reference, from the Dallas Morning News, contains quotes from students and faculty who supported the display of the artwork (e.g. Joanna Gianulis, the student artist; Jeanne Luthi, a senior art major at the University of Dallas; and Juergen Strunck, a University of Dallas art professor).

The statement that “Dr. Lazarus slowly lost popularity among students, faculty, and alumni, especially following his involvement in the Guadalupe Art Print Scandal” is overly broad and not supported by the citations.

However, rather than simply hit “undo”, I thought I would take this opportunity to discuss this difference of opinion by creating a Talk Page for this article. I welcome any comments.

Andrewincowtown (talk) 09:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Why don't we alter the sentence to become more neutral. How does this sound? The link will take the user to the University of Dallas page where a neutral section on the actual incident indicates both sides of the debate, those who supported the display of artwork and those who did not. I won't add it in until I hear from you. Perhaps you could recommend a better way to phrase this? I welcome your suggestions.

"In addition to being involved in several positive moments in the University's history, Dr. Lazarus also played a role in several controversies, including the Guadalupe Art Print Scandal."

Defensor1956 (talk) 06:51 PM, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Brilliant. Please add it just as you indicated. I think your suggested language fulfills the letter and spirit of the Wiki policy on neutrality, which is all I ever wanted in regard to the controversies during his tenure as chief executive.

I also appreciate the professional courtesy of you waiting to hear from me. Thanks.

Andrewincowtown (talk) 19:47, 25 March 2011 (UTC)