Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ethan Leib

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. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 00:44, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ethan Leib[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No independent sources; no indication of notability. —Swpb^talk 14:08, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 19:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 19:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Subject appears to be widely published in his field. Due to the legitimacy of the field (law academia), this page appears to meet the criteria for significance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.191.175.228 (talk) 20:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. One of his books is reviewed here in the New Republic[1]; there are substantial citations of his books and papers[2]. He appears to be widely published in the top-level mainstream press (e.g. LA Times, WaPo, American Scholar) as well as from top academic publishers (Oxford.)--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 21:06, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
probable keep He does have a public profile. See here:[3] and here:[4] I'll be back later to take a closer look.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:42, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:59, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:04, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:36, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:36, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as this seems notable and acceptable enough. SwisterTwister talk 06:15, 4 December 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.