Talk:Louis C. Midgley

changes
This person is extremely insignificant and no noteworthy accomplishments are mentioned. Should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paceurban (talk • contribs) 05:12, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

The opening of the article was slightly POV, referring to anti-Mormons and indepth studies. Midgley uses the term anti-Mormon without restraint, but on Wikipedia that label should be used only in rare cases (to describe Ed Decker, for example, or for early self-identified "anti-Mormons"). The rest of the article I mostly restructured and rearranged.

The Ostling's refer to him in Mormon America as one of the outstanding defenders of orthodox Mormon history. I'll add the citation when I have the book in front of me. I should also check Claudia Bushman's Contemporary Mormonism to see if he's mentioned there. Carneadiiz (talk) 04:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Never mind. What I found about him in Mormon America doesn't really fit a bio. There's also a reference in Breaking the Mormon Code to him being really nasty, but that book is self-published. Bushman doesn't mention him. Carneadiiz (talk) 04:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

how others see Midgley
Hi, I included a bunch of details about a controversy over a Historiography article, including Midgley calling its editing censorship (possibly informed by another Sunstone article). But based on this, another historian, Thomas Alexander described Midgley as misrepresenting the situation and being obtuse. I think it's a good example of the way others view Midgley, and Alexander's comments are in a peer-reviewed Dialogue article. At the same time, I'm not sure if I'm unduly emphasizing this event (but it's one of my few RS on Midgley's "style"). Thoughts? Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 18:53, 21 March 2019 (UTC)