Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Reisman

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was speedy keep - bad faith nomination. FCYTravis 04:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] George Reisman

Reisman is a professor and wrote a book, but this certainly doesn't fulfill Wikipedia's notability requirements. --Jason Gastrich 04:46, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

• Strong delete. Per nom. --Jason Gastrich 04:46, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Another associate of Ayn Rand nominated by a naughty person. Ruby 04:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Ruby --keepsleeping quit your job! slack off! 04:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy keep, one can tell by the nominator's sarcastic language ("is a professor and wrote a book") that this is another in a series of retaliatory AfDs. Reisman is a widely-regarded economist and economic theorist held in wide regard in that community, as evidenced in this article, in which the author puts Reisman on a par with economists Adam Smith, Karl Menger, et al. - WarriorScribe 04:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep. His CV justifies his notability. Crunch 04:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Following the nominator's example, I'm thinking about nominating Jesus for deletion. I mean, he was the son of God and everything, but he's just not that notable. (Plus, I'm a Buddhist.) Dbtfz 04:57, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

  I agree. Only some people believe he was the son of God and he has no sales on Amazon, last I checked. Crunch 05:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

At this point Jesus would probably be ashamed to have a bio on Wikipedia, the way his purported followers are making vindictive nominations on AfD these days. Ruby 05:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

People of many groups have done these vindictive AfD's. In a few weeks will likely have someone of a very different group acting out after some article they cherish is erased. On the other thing I think Jesus has greater things to think about then what Wikipedia does or does not cover.--T. Anthony 12:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

• Strong keep Clearly above-average professor. Dlyons493 Talk 05:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per all of the above except nominator. -- Dragonfiend 05:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Yet another bad faith nomination/WP:POINT violation from Gastrich. Guettarda 06:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep' per those who oppose to deletion. --Terence Ong 06:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Yet another bad faith nomination/WP:POINT violation from Gastrich. Guettarda 06:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep another bad faith, retaliation nomination. Mark K. Bilbo 06:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep - clearly an important academic. --Bduke 11:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:POINT and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jason Gastrich Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 13:38, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Bad faith nomination. CalJW 14:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Can we have a new speedy keep category, "laughable nomination"? Sliggy 14:58, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, notable --kingboyk 17:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Yet another bad faith nomination/WP:POINT violation from Gastrich. --Censorwolf 17:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep Jim62sch 18:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - WP:POINT. Latinus 18:33, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep --NaconKantari (話)|(郵便) 18:45, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. I've never heard of Prof. Reisman. His article states he's a professor....and he wrote a book....and he was a close associate of someone else. I'm not voting, but what in the article should induce me to vote keep? Jcuk 19:16, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, bad faith nom, WP:POINT. After 10 or more of these it is time to block nominator for disruption of Wikipedia. MCB 22:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep vindictive nom by Gastrich of a notable person.Blnguyen 23:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep as blatant violation of WP:POINT. Also, the nominator of this article has a currently ongoing RFC and his motives are clearly suspect. Cyde Weys 23:46, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep with recommendation that nomination to AfD be seen as one done in bad faith. Prof. Reisman is a regular speaker at Mises Institute and other think-tank events, and is highly regarded by even his ideological adversaries. Dick Clark 00:06, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Jason decided to make this us vs. them, and I choose them. --StuffOfInterest 00:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep. Known and respected scholar. Arbustoo 01:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep - respected by Objectivists and Miseans. -Harvestdancer 02:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.