Talk:John Dale (minister)

Untitled
For the sake of NPOV I recommend that the controversial material in the second paragraph of the introductory material on this figure be transferred to a section designated “criticisms” or “controversies” as deemed relevant.

It is of the utmost importance that the introductory paragraph maintain a NPOV and that it contain only empirical biographical material. See other notable religous figures for examples of this. His birth year, should he approve of its publication, would also be more relevant than the date.

Although further additions may be desired, it is my opinion that this article no longer requires the stub designation.

--Victoria h 03:21, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm the article's primary contributor so far, and have implemented the suggestions you made...thanks. Please tell us here if you have further thoughts on how the article can be improved. Your contribution is appreciated. Alan Canon 18:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

"Diploma mill"
I removed this POV characterization from the sentence describing Louisiana Baptist University as a diploma mill:


 * (the latter considered by some a diploma mill.)

I'm no fan of the school, but the linked article describing the school goes to great and effective length to describe the denying of accreditation as well as the above characterization. It seemed like weasel words to me in the context of the current article: anyone who really wanted to get to know the article's subject can easily go and look at the relevant school article and find out all about the diploma mill business. The coupling of the weasely nature of it compounded with the fact that it's off topic that's led me to delete it. But, I don't take censorship of others' words lightly, so I'm placing this comment here to draw attention to what I did, and would encourage others with good reasons to feel free to revert my edit (and to perhaps comment as to why.) Alan Canon 22:13, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree that is a bit smarmy. NPOV and fully accurate would be to simply call it "an unaccredited institution". I think that it is necessary to mention, as it suibstantially affects the characterisization of the institution's scholarship and, by implication, that of its students. -Will Beback 22:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Notability?
This article has been placed on the notability list, but seems to have never been dealt with. Anyone want to make a case for the notability of John Dale? He seems to only be known among a small religious circle and all of the references are from a church website or small-time "brotherhood" publications. Unless that can be established, we should try again for deletion. Also, the article as a whole deals largely with insignificant events and has lots of subtle and not-so-subtle POV. It needs to go. Soonercary (talk) 23:37, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Notability beyond a very small circle of local churches—and sources that are largely from his own church—makes me skeptical that this person is encyclopedic and notable. Josh a brewer (talk) 23:41, 25 December 2023 (UTC)