Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Lewis (academic)


 * 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 was   keep. JohnCD (talk) 19:02, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

David Lewis (academic)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )


 * (''Alternative Find sources "David Lewis" and NGO) )


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.

Fails WP:ACADEMIC. My requests for evidence of notability and for further sourcing keep getting removed. No more edit warring, let's decide this. Using his page at London School of Economics is not a reliable source, as it's a primary source. Woogee (talk) 05:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * KEEP Passes WP:ACADEMIC. I started the article at 23:09 March 31st and it got tagged with 3 tags at 23:10 - which I removed as I was editing the article, had a citation in and I disputed the relevance/appropriateness of the tags as the citation was to the LSEs page which I think is a reputable source. Removed tags again 3 minutes later  and have added what I think is sufficient evidence to pass our criteria. Full prof at LSE - many articles - published noted and reviewed text books - reviews cited   - worked on a noted World Bank report - cited. (Msrasnw (talk) 09:52, 4 April 2010 (UTC))


 * Delete, as fails WP:ACADEMIC. I can't find any notable references to his work to indicate that it is important enough to meet notability criteria. &amp;dorno rocks. (talk) 10:39, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep, available sourcing/referencing appears to demonstrate satisfaction of the GNG. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - full professor, plenty of good cites. Bearian (talk) 23:10, 5 April 2010 (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.