This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
The entire second half of this article, and perhaps the whole piece, is compromised by aggrandizing terminology. Someone please size it down and even it up. Cjs211123:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why the second half is so laudatory is precisely beacuse Weiler is one of the most influential and leading academics and policy-makers of our time. If we gave the blank facts, then it would be impossible to recognise his unique contribution.Harlay (talk) 01:03, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but that's nonsense. Not even in the entry on Beethoven will you find such overblown language. Weiler is, in my opinion, a very good and influential scholar, but even so I find this entry comical.
