Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gordon Wagner (economist)


 * 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 Delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:55, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Gordon Wagner (economist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This person is not notable by WP:ACADEMIC or WP:PERSON. The article is largely unsourced. bender235 (talk) 05:54, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep The article has sources that get to the heart of the matter. He made significant contributions to the international scene.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:03, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 26 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete As written, I would have recommended a speedy especially after doing a search and unable to find ANY 3rd party sources that establish the subject's notability at all. The article sources are the subject's own Master's thesis, Doctoral thesis, and some newsletters. EBY (talk) 02:02, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Question for !Keeps - can you please give some reliable sources that this is a notable economist? I found no international contributions, no other references of any kind, no promise (the subject is dead) of future references. It fails all pertinent notability criteria: WP:NACADEMICS, WP:GNG - WP:BASIC. EBY (talk) 16:14, 27 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep The article is referenced and promising. It needs significant expansion with better references, but should not be deleted.Zigzig20s (talk) 06:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:ACADEMIC. Fails WP:GNG because none of sources are "independent of the subject", almost all of them are from his employers, one is about his doctoral thesis. Just one of a myriad of university professors worldwide. Also see: WP:NOTMEMORIAL Point 4. The LDS may highly esteem the late professor, but that doesn't establish notability. Kraxler (talk) 14:01, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 00:14, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete None of the sources shows evidence of notability. Some have only mentions of him (#1, #5), others are general and not about him at all (#3). Unfortunately, many of the cited sources are no longer available so it is not possible to review them. LaMona (talk) 23:23, 4 November 2014 (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.