Talk:John Frank Clark

Untitled
I re-did the article, it should not be considered a stub anymore. That was assigned the first 24 hours when the article was small and lacking secondary and tertiary references. Caboclo1 (talk) 03:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)Caboclo1

This whole page is completely ridiculous. It is totally biased and embarrassingly fawning. It is in no way written with a "neutral point of view", as required by Wikipedia standards. It is way too long and contains trivial information. I'm nominating it as an Article for Deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.34.59.85 (talk) 05:35, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I have now edited the article to make it neutral and to cut out the dross. It now looks much more like a normal Wikipedia page. I added tags to indicate where citations are needed, where something must be clarified, and so on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.34.59.85 (talk) 18:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Frank Clark. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090415225436/http://www.cies.org/stories/s_jclark.htm to http://www.cies.org/stories/s_jclark.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:59, 24 April 2017 (UTC)