Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ted Frank
and '''speedily close''' nomination.  Speedy deletion is only appropriate when an article does not claim the notability of the subject.  The article as originally written claimed he was a "prominent" attorney; as nominated that word had been removed but there were links to comments and pieces ''by'' (but not ''about'') him in major publications.  I have re-added a statement that he is a "leading" advocate of tort reform, a comment that appears regularly in 3rd party sources throughout the 10,000+ web pages that mention his name.  If deletion is at all appropriate it would be under the AFD process.  However, I believe that too deletion is unwarranted because the individual is clearly notable. I accept that the nomination is in good faith but if I may ask, please do not make assumptions about my motivations for writing the article ().  I have no ax to grind and have not taken part in any of the Michael Moore Wikipedia debates other than to admonish all sides to take a deep breath.  Although the Wikipedia debate alerted me to the issue, I wrote the article after conducting numerous web searches briefly reviewing who he is.  Tort reform is a significant political issue in the United States, his organization is one of its major proponents, and he is a fellow and one of the leaders of the organization.  He writes prolifically and his name is often in the news.  Like it or not, a political activist can boost himself to prominence and notability by writing a lot, taking part extensively in the public debate in America, and catching people's attention.  He seems to have done so.  A comprehensive, encyclopedic coverage of the state of the tort reform in the United States should include information about this individual
— User:Wikidemo, 03:20, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:AGF (Wikipedia:Assume good faith)