| Revision as of 07:14, 20 August 2017 edit62.102.148.158 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:46, 20 August 2017 edit undo331dot (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators182,764 edits →NotabilityNext edit → | ||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
| There are not a lot of source of him as a figure, but I do not think that should be a requirement. The fact that he has been a relatively prominent and cited policy wonk should make him notable enough. For example almost any week you can find some reference to his work in a major publication. For example, this article was only a week ago. He's also routinely cited in the blogosphere in places like Marginal Revolution or semi-highly cited policy papers like I think that he might be on the edge of notability but probably crosses the line into something we should attempt to keep. ] (]) 01:33, 11 March 2017 (UTC) | There are not a lot of source of him as a figure, but I do not think that should be a requirement. The fact that he has been a relatively prominent and cited policy wonk should make him notable enough. For example almost any week you can find some reference to his work in a major publication. For example, this article was only a week ago. He's also routinely cited in the blogosphere in places like Marginal Revolution or semi-highly cited policy papers like I think that he might be on the edge of notability but probably crosses the line into something we should attempt to keep. ] (]) 01:33, 11 March 2017 (UTC) | ||
| :I invite {{u|Confusingfuture}} to discuss their concerns here. ] (]) 07:46, 20 August 2017 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:46, 20 August 2017
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Template:WikiProject Libertarianism
| ||||||||||||||||||
Reality Check: How is this at all significant?
Why does this exists and why is it significant? This is clearly written by Will to promote himself using Misplaced Pages as a platform to promote himself. This is useless to anyone but will. It is way too detailed, not a single person buys that this was written by anyone but Will. No one gives a fuck about randoms who worked at CATO and measured "freedom" by if the state allowed you to fuck your cousins. Will, no one cares. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.102.148.158 (talk) 07:09, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Update
I'm the subject of this entry. A lot of this is out-dated now. I'd change it myself, but I understand that's frowned upon. So, is there a process by which I can suggest revisions to the entry that others can review and make if suitable? Thanks.
-- I updated some facts about this, including added that you are now an MFA student at Univ of Houston. Haven't followed your work enough to know all your current affiliations.
--Considering I just made a change to the entry concerning your Canadian-American-ness, I'd be happy to hear what you actually prefer/profess and whatever else you want updated. Kimcmich (talk) 05:03, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Departure from Cato Institute
This article suggests Wilkinson and Brink Lindsey were fired from the Cato Institute for ideological noncompliance: http://www.frumforum.com/the-purge-at-cato Lippard (talk) 19:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Deletion
Reading the proposed delete tag again, I saw that I could prevent deletion just by deleting it, so I did that, since I think my additions improved the case for notability enough to make it clear. I think the entry is now a somewhat worse, hwowever, since a lot of the added information you would include not so much for the sake of a reader looking for information, but for an editor proposing to delete it. But I guess that's how this works.
--Slangshot (talk) 06:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I oppose deletion and even consider the proposal a little puzzling, just glancing at it. I've followed Will's blog, and his other work, a long time and was amazed to see the proposed deletion flag. Wilkinson is a fellow at a major think tank, regularly appears on Marketplace, which is major media, has a weekly video blog show in which he has interviewed a number of bestselling authors (he's not just talking to his friends). He's published in a lot of places. Though I think it now seems unduly promotional (could this be an unintended side-effect of notability challenges?), I added some links to major media in which Wilkinson is cited as an expert, and included some public appearances at debates and forums where it seems like the fact that he is there at all establishes a kind of notability. How many people have debated Jeffrey Sachs? Regarding BigTurtle's comment, Wilkinson seems to me a significant young public intellectual, as the David Brooks New York Times column mention noted by BinaryBits would seem to attest. He also has a blog, but he's not primarily "a blogger". I'm new to this, so I don't know if I did all the code right. Sorry if not. But I wanted to do something because it seems a pretty clear case to me. Thanks.
--Slangshot (talk) 06:42, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I oppose the deletion of this page. After watching bloggingheads.tv, I searched for Wilkinson's wiki page to find out more about him. I represent an independent interest in this page.
Danieltmasterson (talk) 04:24, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
It is true that Mr. Wilkinson is a thoughtful, intelligent blogger who is connected with a serious policy organization. However, Misplaced Pages probably does not have room for all of the thoughtful, intelligent bloggers who are writing in English right now. Therefore I support this deletion. Bigturtle (talk) 19:05, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- Uh, actually it does. It definitely does have the room. --J.Dayton (talk) 21:16, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm not going to register a formal vote on this since Will's a friend of mine, but his mention by David Brooks certainly boosted his notability. Binarybits (talk) 23:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Bigturtle said: "Misplaced Pages probably does not have room for all of the thoughtful, intelligent bloggers who are writing in English right now." I would argue to the contrary, as well as reiterate that Wilkinson is not merely a blogger. Lippard (talk) 19:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Notability
The refs are either authored by WW or a passing mention. Not seeing how it passes notability by either WP:JOURNALIST or the general notability guideline. Anyone have sources that are actually about him as a figure? czar ⨹ 23:25, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
There are not a lot of source of him as a figure, but I do not think that should be a requirement. The fact that he has been a relatively prominent and cited policy wonk should make him notable enough. For example almost any week you can find some reference to his work in a major publication. For example, thisNew Yorker article was only a week ago. He's also routinely cited in the blogosphere in places like Marginal Revolution or semi-highly cited policy papers like this. I think that he might be on the edge of notability but probably crosses the line into something we should attempt to keep. Dark567 (talk) 01:33, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- I invite Confusingfuture to discuss their concerns here. 331dot (talk) 07:46, 20 August 2017 (UTC)