Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Statistical consultant
For any number of reasons.  First, the article appears to meet erify, , and  policies (It is clearly a legitimate type of consultanting with lots of practioners and plenty of professional journal coverage ) and no other specific guideline was invoked arguing for deletion.  The veiled argument that ''do we need an article on every possible type of consultant?'' is clearly POV and is not a legitimate deletion argument!  I would suspect that if I suggested ''Do we need an article on every possible type of musician?'' in WP (of which there probably is), I would get laughed out of town.  Inclusion of articles in WP ought to be based on erify, , and  policies, not someone's feeling that something shouldn't be included
— User:Mike, 17:45, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:V||WP:NOR||WP:NPOV||WP:V||WP:NOR||WP:NPOV (Wikipedia:Verifiability)