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 redirect to Good Faith Collaboration. Will leave the edit history intact in case anyone wants to merge anything, J04n(talk page) 15:04, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Reagle[edit]

Joseph Reagle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Apparent lack of sufficient notability to satisfy WP:NACADEMIC Geogene (talk) 23:19, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And I realize he wrote an important book about Wikipedia, but I agree with the editor that created the page (as a redirect to the book) in 2011 that the subject isn't notable. I realize that we tend to have biases here that may make the subject appear more notable to us than, say, an assistant professor in the humanities, and think policy should apply equally. Geogene (talk) 23:23, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Geogene (talk) 23:35, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent)|lambast 00:59, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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.