Talk:History of Jehovah's Witnesses/Archive 1

NPOV

 * There are a variety of reasons which lead me to have a problem with the reference to cults in the 1916-1942 section. The first is a complete lack of any citations, either to a definition of cults or to a piece of Jehovah's Witness documentation outlining the cited doctrine of free will.  In short, the section feels a bit too POV for me, and this problem is exacerbated by the fact that I really can't attempt to edit to a more neutral stance due to a lack of referencing.  I don't want to remove large sections of material from a well-organized article that is the result of a lot of work and I don't want to step on any toes, so please, someone help me out here.  --Vengeful Cynic 05:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The paragraph doesnt't even refer to anything in the time period mentioned. It seems out of place. Ithink it should be moved to another section or article or even deleted.George 22:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Excellent edits by Joshbuddy where he merged in a rather impressive couple of paragraphs from the main Jehovah's Witness page and removed the suspect cult references. Very nice editing.  --Vengeful Cynic 12:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Eschatological chart
We have one of the main article, we have one on the eschatology article, do we really need another chart here? josh buddy talk 15:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It's pretty handy for historical reference. --Vengeful Cynic 16:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but do we need 3 charts on the history of JW eschatology in the JW articles? I say let's leave the ones on the main page and on the eschatology page. That will allow for more information to be put here on the side history page in the future.Dtbrown 14:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I still would favor some sort of timeline, one that would encompass not just eschatological date changes, but would be inclusive to all events in Jehovah's Witness history. josh  buddy talk 15:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I like that idea! Dtbrown 04:00, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Timeline looks great! Dtbrown 17:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Lead-in
I love the new lead-in. Its a great start.

Just a note, that the lead-in needs to summarize the whole article. josh buddy talk 06:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 20:31, 3 May 2016 (UTC)