Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Nissman


 * 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 speedy keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Nomination withdrawn, uncontested. Owen&times; &#9742;  20:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

David Nissman

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

BLP of a U.S. district attorney who has a solid career but I don’t see sources to suggest he is notable. Mccapra (talk) 22:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen&times; &#9742;  00:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Caribbean,  and United States of America. Mccapra (talk) 22:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * This raises an interesting question. We have never established that a U.S. Attorney is inherently notable. On the one hand, they are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and have substantial power over federal legal prosecutions in their jurisdiction. On the other hand, they still answer to orders from the Attorney General, and can be fired by the administration that appointed them in the first place. One would think that a U.S. Attorney would receive fairly substantial coverage, to be found if sought. BD2412  T 23:02, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 *  Leaning keep, based on a review of Newspapers.com coverage. Apparently, the subject has also written a number of books in the field, and received additional coverage for running unsuccessfully for a seat on the Oregon Supreme Court in 1984. BD2412  T 23:31, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Georgia (U.S. state) and Oregon.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  00:11, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Note: having added about a dozen sources and found some more likely points of notability, particularly with respect to the subject's publications reviewed in reliable sources, I am upgrading my !vote to "keep". BD2412  T 15:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Withdraw thanks for finding those sources. I think he passes as the author of several books that have been independently reviewed and amount to an important contribution to his field. Mccapra (talk) 20:50, 31 January 2024 (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.