Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benn Steil

: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. Michig (talk) 18:02, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

=[[Benn Steil]]=

:{{la|Benn Steil}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Benn_Steil Stats])

:({{Find sources|Benn Steil}})

Fails WP:COI, WP:BIO and WP:GNG. Puff piece article, by user User:Fadesga, who also created the article for the book. The Battle of Bretton Woods: John Maynard Keynes, Harry Dexter White, and the Making of a New World Order scope_creep 17:34, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Keep. I am still editing this article. Regards, --Fadesga (talk) 22:12, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep passes WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:39, 25 July 2014 (UTC).
  • Keep per WP:PROF#C1 (heavily cited publications) and #C8 (founding editor of a notable journal). —David Eppstein (talk) 23:30, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep Clearly notable on grounds of being an editor-in-chief.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:35, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep Sufficient coverage in secondary sources, passes WP:Prof --– sampi (talkcontribemail) 03:58, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep it is not a "puff piece." there is no COI. it describes his credentials & summarizes one of his arguments in a sentence. Rjensen (talk) 17:21, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep Passes WP:PROF. I can't see COI issue. Jim Carter (from public cyber) 11:59, 29 July 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.