It was a "tactical" deletion request. I find
that to be a pretty silly maneuver, personally, particularly as the nominators never do a
very good job >as devil's advocate. If jbmurray didn't think the article should
be deleted, he should not have wasted his own time and that of other volunteers >by
nominating it.
I consider this to be yet another example that would justify an essay I’ve always thought
of writing, “The real world is not Wikipedia”, a thought first kicked off by the
nomination for this AfD:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Streisand_effe….
in which the nominator (who left the project a long time ago) decided Wikipedia policy
should apply to the documents we accept as reliable sources (as opposed to the IP on the
talk page, who seems to have felt the article should have gone beyond the notability
policy and tried to explain why scholars would have found Ms. Imlay notable enough to
write about.
This happened to another article I contributed to that reached FA status, as well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:New_York_State_Route_32/Archive_1#Question
It really came down to “yes, it’s notable, but it shouldn’t be”.
Daniel Case