Talk:Paul Blanshard

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.

Biography Unassessed

	Biography portal 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 not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Journalism Unassessed

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I recently did some research on Brand Blanshard and found your new article on his brother Paul informative and interesting. Thanks for creating it. Two suggestions: (1) At the end of your blockquote explicitly identify the work associated with "p. 4"; (2) in para 4, instead of saying "the book version" identify the book by name. WikiPedant 07:45, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Blanshard was also an eugenist

Paul Blanshard was also an eugenist.Even in 1950 decade, his books and speaches were supporting eugenics.Agre22 (talk) 23:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)agre22[reply]

Sorry, that is false. Although he was an acquaintance of Margaret Sanger - whose major mistake in life was affiliation with the Eugenics Society - Paul Blanshard did not make the same mistake. One looks in vain for his name upon the preserved membership rosters of the Eugenics Society. Paul Blanshard was not an elitist in any manner. This is clear from his basically socialist politics and his leadership of the American Humanist Association. Whoever wrote the above, your obligation is to read his autobiography, Personal and Controversial. - - Ed Chilton —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.176.133 (talk) 13:31, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is garbage!

The grammar and syntax are atrocious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.147.241.181 (talk) 02:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality and Paul Blanshard

Unlike his fraternal twin brother, philosopher Brand Blanshard, Paul Blanshard was and remains one of the most polarizing figures in U.S. history. To coin a phrase: History is war. It is frequently a battleground, and necessarily so in a real-time, online, People's Encyclopedia. Prior versions of this biographical sketch had the pendulum swung into the zone of apoplectic vitriol, yet no calls for so-called Neutrality were forthcoming at the top of the article. The concept of neutrality has all but disappeared from journalism and expecting it here seems slightly Pollyanish. Sources, for example, are not neutral. Is the Catholic Encyclopedia neutral about Paul Blanshard? The best achievement of neutrality was displayed by Pope John XXIII, who invited him to attend Vatican II.

In a printed encyclopedia, the biographical sketches of Brand and Paul would appear contiguous to each other, and each man would be better understood by readers who examined both articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.82.60.165 (talk) 15:24, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]