Talk:Robert Audi

Hm, does the phrase "without pandering to the continental Zeitgeist" really suit the "Neutral point of view" standards? --134.184.67.185 14:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

(new author) Never edited anything here yet, so hoping a note will draw attention to this. In the article, it states " Baxter stated that the other side of the controversy ws represented by the scholars Robert Wolterstorff and Paul J. Weithman." I am pretty sure you mean Nicholas Wolterstorff, not "Robert Wolterstorff." Nicholas Wolterstorff and Audi discussed this topic in their written debate "Religion in the Public Square. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. 1997"

There is also a typo - "ws", should be "was." Timandmonica (talk) 09:53, 9 March 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 04:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

The section under this heading is deficient --- it does not clearly or fully state Audi's viewpoint or the opposing viewpoint. Please complete it with a full account. ---Dagme (talk) 02:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC) [reply ]

I have removed the section "Religion in the public square". As user Dagme pointed out, it lacked content on Audi's views. If someone feels that this content was important then I suggest they either rewrite it or put it into clear context to Audi's position.Phlsph7 (talk) 13:24, 4 November 2020 (UTC) [reply ]