Deletion of David J. Strachman

Comment: The book the subject wrote is notable. It is stocked by the http://encore.law.yale.edu/iii/encore/record/C__Rb1236701__SActions+and+defenses+--+United+States.__P0,1__Orightresult__X3;jsessionid=7071C1E543BA7C80A34E8E14BE96E598?lang=eng&suite=cobalt Yale Law library and http://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/7705533 Stanford Law library (Crown library). I saw one review http://www.wisbar.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Wisconsin_Lawyer&template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&contentid=81566 here. Those libraries stock only notable books, and also note the book has gone into a second edition. There is also scattered coverage in the http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE1D61030F93BA3575AC0A96E9C8B63&ref=victormarrero NY Times, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/17/AR2006071701177.html Washington Post, another http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/11/AR2008021102627.html Washington Post article, in http://books.google.com/books?id=w3ouAQAAIAAJ a book, and as a contributor to http://www.newjurist.com/writer-corner.html New Jurist. Enough coverage in independent, reliable, third-party sources to pass . If the subject wants the article gone, he should contact OTRS; we have no way of verifying how genuine nom's claim is, nor whether we are legally required to delete the article for whatever reason (policy, per se, doesn't ask us to
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Certainly notable per .  It doesn't really matter if he wants the article to exist or not.  If he thinks he's being besmirched in some way, he can take it to 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:BLPN)