Talk:R. H. Naylor

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://web.archive.org/web/20061021002102/http://www.meta-religion.com/Esoterism/Astrology/into_the_twentieth_century.htm. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Pro-astrology bias?
This seems like it's rather biased towards astrology - a little bit of editorializing (probably in the source), and it gives the appearance that only the successes are mentioned. Now, admittedly, those are the notable ones, as they appear to have increased his popularity, but it gives this a rather strong pro-astrology slant. As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:30, 25 October 2014 (UTC)