Talk:Peter Kwasniewski

Viewpoint?
Several remarks in this seemed like they were designed to promote him, or used biased language ("tradition-friendly"?). Is it noteworthy that a traditionalist blogger liked his book? A claim he had written over 1400 articles was unsourced (original research). I removed these statements and put explanations for why. Chrysologus (talk) 05:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * the tone is indeed promotional at times, and the details sometimes look more like those you would find in a CV than in an encyclopedia notice. Veverve (talk) 02:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I really concur here. Additionally, WP:Notability seems to be in question as well.
 * Maximilian775 (talk) 05:26, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
Appears to meet WP:AUTHOR now. Legacypac (talk) 12:17, 7 May 2018 (UTC)