Talk:Antonio Santosuosso

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.

It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo during a public appearance, or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead.

[edit] NPOV

In Barbarians, Marauders, and Infidels, Santosuosso, considered an expert historian of the Carolingian era, makes a compelling case that the defeats of invading Muslim armies by Charles Martel, including the famous defeat at Tours, were important as in their defense of Western Christianity and the preservation of those Christian monasteries and centres of learning which ultimately led Europe out of the Dark Ages. He also makes a compelling case that while Tours was unquestionably of macrohistorical importance, the later battles were at least equally so. Both invading forces defeated in those campaigns had come to set up permanent outposts for expansion, and there can be no doubt that these three defeats combined broke the back of Islamic expansion in Europe while the Caliphate was still united. Compelling case?

--Soumyasch 04:48, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

This info was brought here from another article where it was removed and put back. Whatever isn't neutral about it, remove. I removed "compelling." Srnec 05:45, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed the other "compelling" and the NPOV tag. Is there any reason for the tag? - Runcorn 07:50, 1 April 2006 (UTC)