This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
Wow, maybe it's a generational thing, but I just got really annoyed just now, looking for this article (my disappointment at its size is another issue). Anyway, I think it's absurd that the author of one of the top selling non-fiction books of the 20th century isn't even accorded the courtesy of a dab page. Frankly, I'd go even further, and move this article to David Reuben, which is currently a redirect to David and Simon Reuben. For now, I'll hold off and give myself a week or two to ponder the matter before doing anything precipitous. But it just seems . . . well, stupid, that if the other David Reuben is in a shared article (with his brother), that the single name article is not attached to this single David Reuben, despite the current paucity of text in the article. (And the other article is no Faberge egg, either--it's mainly a listing of the holdings of these two exceptionally wealthy brothers--whom I had never heard of before today.) HuskyHuskie (talk) 15:09, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
