This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
There are a couple instances of vandalism by both sides here. "Falso prophecies" is a bit much for the anti-crowd. A total lack of focus on commentary about his drinking problem is just as bad from the pro crowd. The misinformation in the talk page is just as bad. There was no San Francisco mansion for the returned saints, it was Beth Serim in San Diego. We're also missing a bunch of personal history. The man was married and had children, his children didn't join the movement (I'm not sure if they are sympathetic of not since histories of the movement are sparse). The article also fails to concentrate on his contributions to the organization of the movement which in many ways became what is commonly recognized as "Jehovah's Witnesses" under his watch. I'm going to try to clean up the obvious vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickjost (talk • contribs) 20:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
So a commentary
Early life-> I believe he only served as a substitute judge once. If someone can dig out a citation that would be nice. Again we should mention his married life and children. "Unfulfilled expectations rather than "promised dates" seems to be the prevailing attitude, past and present, and shows humility in correcting "misguided statements"" is POV and reflects the movements not histories view of the man.
Imprisonment -> Contains a reference to the completion of Studies in the Scriptures which should probably be broken out. This new section should contain information on this being one of the points that led to an eventual schism within the movement. It also alludes to the Studies as reason for the imprisonment. This is not the case. They were being held on charges stemming from the belief that they were sympathetic to the Nazis (related to their position on enlistment in armed forces) which is covered in the next few lines. I'm not sure how poor circulation could lead to a lung condition but the reason for his removal is disputed. Some believe he was moved because of developing problems with alcoholism. THIS IS NOT A VALID REASON TO INSERT THE VANDALISM ON "pass the whiskey" CHARGES. Keep it NPOV!
Death -> Citation? That seems odd. The man is wildly respected to this day. It would be bizarre in the extreme to have such a small services. Is this in reference to a graveside service? It seem very POV (that is, it implies that he was abandoned as he died).
Impact -> Saying "six years" really downplays the millions now living sermons. This line was popular well into the 80's. He also is responsible for ably managing the shock from the 1917, 1920, 1925 failures which shows almost wizardly management skills. The quotation used on "advertise the king and his kingdom" imply that the Lord's Prayer uses the word "advertise". It also uses the non-standard "model prayer" which implies that the paragraph was either written by a Witness or lifted from a Witness work. It would be helpful also to point out that both Norr and Franz were hand picked "death-bed" successors.
I am missing my reference works. If someone would pick up and fix this I'd be much obliged. The man is an incredibly interesting and dynamic individual who deserves better than the sloppy polemics from both sides shown here. Nickjost 20:50, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
