Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Goldman
fails  ... having something from a blog entry covered in a single magazine article (also note that it's the ''second'' blog that made the news, not the first prediction from a year ago), and a casual mention in another article about a completely unrelated subject (Google's anti-trust case), are hardly "notable accomplishments" worthy of an article ... if he's such an authority, then why aren't there more citations for him other than his blog? ''Noteriety'' is not the same thing as ''notability''. Remember, '''he''' is supposed to be the ''subject'' of multiple articles, and so far, it's only his ''prediction'' that has been the subject of a single article in an industry trade journal that is not widely read by the general public (InformationWeek is a long way from New York Times or Wall Street Journal kind of exposure, right?) ... being quoted (along with others) in one Law.com article (about Google) is not sufficient. Maybe add a paragraph to Criticisms of Wikipedia#Recent media discussions with the InformationWeek citation, but ''what they said about some topic'' is not the same as ''what they have accomplished'', and while the ''topic'' may be notable, that does not grant notability to the ''speaker
— User:Dennette, 15:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:BIO (Wikipedia:Notability)