Talk:Alan Greenspan: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
George Swan (talk | contribs) (→Provenance: new section) |
George Swan (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
The stub I started today does not contain any intellectual material from the wikipedia... [[User:George Swan|George Swan]] ([[User talk:George Swan|talk]]) 21:20, 4 February 2024 (CST) | The stub I started today does not contain any intellectual material from the wikipedia... [[User:George Swan|George Swan]] ([[User talk:George Swan|talk]]) 21:20, 4 February 2024 (CST) | ||
* I don't know why, maybe it is built in to the {{tl|PropDel}} template, but the article page incorrectly asserts the article is adapted from the wikipedia article of the same name. [[User:John Leach|John]], do you think that is why it makes that claim? [[User:George Swan|George Swan]] ([[User talk:George Swan|talk]]) 04:34, 5 February 2024 (CST) | |||
==The topic of Alan Greenspan does not merit deletion== | ==The topic of Alan Greenspan does not merit deletion== | ||
Latest revision as of 04:34, 5 February 2024
Provenance
The stub I started today does not contain any intellectual material from the wikipedia... George Swan (talk) 21:20, 4 February 2024 (CST)
- I don't know why, maybe it is built in to the {{PropDel}} template, but the article page incorrectly asserts the article is adapted from the wikipedia article of the same name. John, do you think that is why it makes that claim? George Swan (talk) 04:34, 5 February 2024 (CST)
The topic of Alan Greenspan does not merit deletion
I don't think the topic of Alan Greenspan merits deletion. He was considered one of the most influential officials in the USA for almost three decades.
I am guessing that the proposed deletion was based not on his importance, but rather on a guess the article would never get past the definition phase. George Swan (talk) 21:20, 4 February 2024 (CST)