Talk:Kohler strikes

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour 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.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wisconsin Low‑importance

	Wisconsin portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin 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.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Confusing article

Too many references to too many "Walter J. Kohler, Srs" with differing dates for the births and deaths (1875-1940, 1891-1968). Walter J. Kohler, Sr. (1891-1968) is also shown to have a half-brother, also named Walter J. Kohler, Sr. If they were all truly known as "Walter J. Kohler, Sr." then listing them by full name, including middle name, would be in order. 1934 strike information doesn't indicate which side the deceased participants were on and the number of "wounded" is a mismatch (45 including deaths vs. 49).Dmcgrann (talk) 03:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing is putting it mildly. "Walter J. Kohler, Sr." is his own half-brother? (1st para under Strikes of 1954) thundt (talk) 20:31, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

POV Neutrality

Walter was a benevolent employer. He developed attractive and affordable housing in the Village for workers, built a handsome facility for newly-arrived immigrants, paid above average wages — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.129.138.31 (talk) 01:09, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article is clearly anti-union, claims are not supported, and much appears to be outright lies. Please advise on how to proceed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.129.138.31 (talk) 01:34, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]