Thank you for your kind words about my work on the most negatively biased sentence in the Faith Healing article. At least some of the bias has been removed, but I think you will agree there is a lot more that needs to be done before we can claim that the article has a WP:NPOV.
In any commercial encyclopaedia, any article is written by an expert in that field. In Wikipedia, however, there is nothing to stop an editor from composing an article on a subject to which he is vehemently opposed, and using it as a kind of coathook on which to hang all sorts of references to opposing views. This is surely contrary to the spirit and ethics of Wikipedia, but I think this is what has happened in this case. (qv numerous references to the Skeptics Dictionary) But Wikipedia is a source of information, not a soap-box! WP:SOAP.
Faith healing has, throughout history, been controversial; we needn't expect it to be any less controversial now. Of course successful spiritual healing cannot be explained within the confines of conventional scientific wisdom. But that doesn't mean it didn't happen!
We editors have much work to do improving this article, to be fair to the readers, and to allow faith healing to be presented in a light which leaves them to make up their own minds as to whether to go down this path or not. I look forward to working with you and other editors on this project. Bblandford (talk) 09:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC)