Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judy Feder


 * 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, noting that the later keep arguments accommodate some of the concerns expressed in the earlier delete opinions. --Tikiwont 13:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Judy Feder

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article on a losing candidate in the 2006 US elections looks very much like a coatrack on which to hang a story about how she really would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for those meddling kids pollsters.

As a losing candidate, this is a news story, to be avoided in the case of living individuals, unless there are more sources about her life outside of this unsuccessful campaign. Cruftbane 18:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:BIO unless she has accomplishments that are unlisted. I don't think this qualifies as COATRACK as all the links to pertain to her campaign; it's just simple WP:POV. COATRACK would be if the article were "she lost to her opponent, a known sexual deviant who has been convicted of securities fraud in Patalunia, where he has mob connections and a second wife." You know, introducing material primarily about something else. In any case, notability grounds are sufficient for deletion. --Dhartung | Talk 18:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Documenting everyone who ever ran for public office and didn't win is outside the reasonable scope of a general-interest encyclopedia. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  19:09, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable.--Bedivere 21:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep at least through 2008. She is running again, so this may get extended if she wins and becomes a public official. She currently has a cash on hand advantage over her opponent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.244.214.30 (talk) 14:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The following also looks like a Keep opinion although the person who wrote it didn't begin with the bolded word keep. I fear anyone counting these may miss it if I don't point this out. Michael Hardy 01:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Judy Feder is one of the nation's leaders in health policy, particularly in efforts to improve the nation's health insurance system. According to her c.v., http://ihcrp.georgetown.edu/pdfs/judycv.pdf, she is an elected member of the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Social Insurance. She worked in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services during the William Clinton health reform debate, and served as staff director of the U.S. Bipartisan Commission on Comprehensive Health Care (the so-called Pepper Commission) of the U.S. Congress in 1989-1991. She has more accomplishments, which are indeed unlisted in the article. She's coming to deliver a lecture on health policy at Syracuse University in two days, http://www-cpr.maxwell.syr.edu/lourie_lecture/lourie.htm. As soon as her visit is over, I will be glad to devote time to expanding this article, including providing references. In the meantime, considering that health care reform is a major topic in the 2008 presidential campaign, please hold off on deletion. MWBONNEY, brand new user, 10/17/2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwbonney (talk • contribs) 20:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. This Google Archive and Google Books search indicates that she is a notable Democratic health care advisor, even excluding the Frank Wolf race. -- Groggy Dice T | C 03:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep and reorganize. She is apparently Professor at Georgetown, and Dean of their Georgetown Public Policy Institute, apparently the author of a number of publications -- as one would expect from the position. . As such, she is very likely notable. She is a member of the Institute of Medicine, along with the better known National Academy of Science and National Academy of engineering one of the 3 parts of the US National Academies. All members of the US NAS have always without exception been considered notable at Wikipedia, just as with the Royal Society and other national academies. Due to the limited interests of WP editors, few articles have yet been written about the member of the IoM and the NAE, but they too should certainly be considered intrinsically notable. Her related public policy activities will add to it, and her political campaign is significant enough to at least be  some part of the article, though probably not enough to justify it alone.  I will rewrite the article accordingly. Whoever wrote the article didn't realise what constitutes WP notability, and apparently was only interested in her politics.   I'm glad I noticed this one. DGG (talk) 10:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I've just rewritten it.DGG (talk) 11:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Apparently this is one of those cases where AfD nomination is what was needed to get the article into proper shape. Michael Hardy 16:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Thanks to DGG for their rewrite I think the subject of this article very clearly merits coverage in the wikipedia. Geo Swan 17:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: Feder was mentioned in the Syracuse Post-Dispatch on October 16 2007, earlier on the day this nomination was made. Feder had been invited to come to Syracuse, from Washington, to give the memorial lecture for a charitable foundation.  The Post-Dispatch wrote: "Feder is one of the nation's leaders in health policy, with expertise in the uninsured, Medicare and long-term care."
 * I am concerned this nomination, and some of the comments here, were made by wikipedians who didn't may not have made the effort to reach an informed opinion on the merits for an article on this subject. --  Geo Swan 17:35, 21 October 2007 (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.