Talk:John Santerineross

Cleanup needed
It appears at first glance that this fellow is notable but the article is not encylopedic in tone, expresses a point of view, and it has the feel of a vanity article. --William Pietri 08:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Stubbified
I have stubbified this page, as the cleanup tag wasn't getting us anywhere. I've added some references in case somebody would like to extend the article. William Pietri 09:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Elaboration
I put in a bunch of information last week- I don't know what the tone of the article was before, but hopefully it sounds mostly neutral and encylopedic now. I removed the "stub" status. Afries 17:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Why does this article contain so much information about Bill Donahue and not the artist in question? The entire article comes across as biased against the artist, whose background, and history has been removed (from when I originally viewed this profile) and replaced with this bias Catholic agenda. How is wikipedia condoning this type of taking over of someone's page/information? Regardless of your opinion of the artist's work he has as much right to a proper bio that isn't cluttered with agendas of other people, such as Bill Donahue. (Imiaslavie (talk) 22:08, 27 February 2010 (UTC))


 * Welcome to Wikipedia, the encyclopedia anyone can edit. Free fell to improve the article is whatever way(s) you feel is appropriate. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:05, 8 March 2010 (UTC)