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 Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
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
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Policies and Guidelines, a collaborative effort to simplify and consolidate Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Policies and GuidelinesWikipedia:WikiProject Policies and GuidelinesTemplate:WikiProject Policies and GuidelinesPolicies and Guidelines
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.TaxationWikipedia:WikiProject TaxationTemplate:WikiProject TaxationTaxation
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal
Latest comment: 6 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Prior content in this draft duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.bakerinstitute.org/expert/george-r-zodrow. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original orplagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. msk18:07, 24 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion
(1) My understanding is that the strongest basis for notability is WP:NPROF Criterion 1, concerning research that has had a significant impact within a scholarly discipline. The clearest example is Zodrow’s 1986 paper with Peter Mieszkowski on capital tax competition. Later independent scholarship has repeatedly characterized this work as foundational. A Handbook of Public Economics survey states that “the formal literature on tax competition is largely rooted” in the models developed by Zodrow and Mieszkowski and John D. Wilson, while other published work describes the framework as a “workhorse” model, “canonical,” and a “classic” contribution to the literature. I believe these are unusually direct examples of later scholars identifying a specific research contribution as central to the development of a field, rather than simply citing the paper in passing.
There is also substantial professional recognition of his impact in public economics and public policy. In 2009, Zodrow received the Steven D. Gold Award, presented by the National Tax Association together with the National Conference of State Legislatures and the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management. The award specifically recognizes significant contributions to state and local fiscal policy and the ability to bridge academic research and public policy. At the presentation, James M. Poterba of MIT, then president of the National Tax Association, described Zodrow as “a leading international expert on state and local tax policy” and referred to his work as “pathbreaking research” on the major taxes used by state and local governments. Given the National Tax Association’s central role in the field of public finance and taxation, I believe this award is particularly relevant evidence of recognition by the professional community in which Zodrow works.
His broader scholarly record also supports this picture. Google Scholar currently reports more than 7,000 citations to his work. I understand that Google Scholar citation counts are only supporting evidence and should not establish notability by themselves, but I think the citation record is consistent with the independent scholarly assessments of the influence of his research.
(2) I have also revised the draft substantially in response to your concern that it read too much like a promotional CV. I removed references that relied on Zodrow’s own writings or self-descriptions to establish the importance of his work, and I have tried to support claims of significance with reliable, external sources instead — especially independent journal articles, handbook chapters, published commentary by other economists, and recognition from professional organizations. I also condensed or removed routine biographical and professional details that were not directly relevant to notability. My goal has been to make the article read as an independently sourced academic biography rather than a summary of Zodrow’s own CV or publications.
Based on these revisions, I believe the draft now makes a clearer case that Zodrow meets WP:NPROF Criterion 1through the documented influence of his research on public economics, especially the development of modern capital tax-competition theory, and through significant recognition by the public-finance profession. I would be very grateful for any further guidance on whether the revised sourcing and presentation now address the concerns you raised. Andiyxc (talk) 19:00, 23 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hi, thank you for your considered, detailed and helpful reply; and the constructive amendments to the draft.
Firstly, I would encourage you to create a User Page as it will make communicating much for efficient and ensure you don't miss notifications, like to my reply here.
Latest comment: 7 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Comment: Well done on creating the draft, and it likely meets the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, WP:NPROF) but requires some cleanup and clarification from you first please. As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple publishedsecondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. In short, "notability" requires reliable sources about the subject, rather than by the subject.The image used likely breaches copyright, which Wikipedia takes seriously, so should be removed unless clear evidence of its legal use is provided. If it is indeed the draft's author's "Own work" then the author clearly knows the subject and has a conflict of interest that must be declared (see details below). It seems highly unlikely that it is /they are the draft's author's "Own work", unless the author is also a professional photographer, but no such evidence has been provided.Additionally, the draft tends to read too much like a promotional CV or advertorial (see WP:PROMO and WP:EXCESSDETAIL), which Wikipedia is not. Also, if you have any connection to the subject, which you clearly do given the image used (discussed above), including being paid or being the subject, you must declare that on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please see WP:COI and/or WP:PAID). In instances of a conflict of interest, the review of the page needs to be handled with care, mindful of the higher bar set by pages produced in circumstances of such a conflict. Such pages typically may read too much like a promotional CV or advertorial (see WP:PROMO), which Wikipedia is not; and/or contain prose that is not of a standard appropriate for an encyclopaedia (also see WP:PEACOCK and WP:NPV). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page.It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:NPROF criteria #3, because XXXXX"). Once you have implemented these suggestions, you may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page, including the name of the draft page, and I would be happy to reassess. Again, please ‘’’post your responses on the draft's talk page’’’, not on my Talk page. As I said, I do think this draft has potential so please do persevere. Cabrils (talk) 01:32, 22 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
Comment: Contains a large amount of cv style detail like complete employment history, publication lists and family information. Consider trimming routine content and focusing on most significant contributions, per WP:NOTCV. This seems to pass GNG to me. Accesscrawl (talk) 09:58, 3 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Prior content in this draft duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.bakerinstitute.org/expert/george-r-zodrow. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
Comment: Well done on creating the draft, and it likely meets the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, WP:NPROF) but requires some cleanup and clarification from you first please. As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. In short, "notability" requires reliable sources about the subject, rather than by the subject.The image used likely breaches copyright, which Wikipedia takes seriously, so should be removed unless clear evidence of its legal use is provided. If it is indeed the draft's author's "Own work" then the author clearly knows the subject and has a conflict of interest that must be declared (see details below). It seems highly unlikely that it is /they are the draft's author's "Own work", unless the author is also a professional photographer, but no such evidence has been provided.Additionally, the draft tends to read too much like a promotional CV or advertorial (see WP:PROMO and WP:EXCESSDETAIL), which Wikipedia is not. Also, if you have any connection to the subject, which you clearly do given the image used (discussed above), including being paid or being the subject, you must declare that on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please see WP:COI and/or WP:PAID). In instances of a conflict of interest, the review of the page needs to be handled with care, mindful of the higher bar set by pages produced in circumstances of such a conflict. Such pages typically may read too much like a promotional CV or advertorial (see WP:PROMO), which Wikipedia is not; and/or contain prose that is not of a standard appropriate for an encyclopaedia (also see WP:PEACOCK and WP:NPV). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page.It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:NPROF criteria #3, because XXXXX"). Once you have implemented these suggestions, you may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page, including the name of the draft page, and I would be happy to reassess. Again, please ‘’’post your responses on the draft's talk page’’’, not on my Talk page. As I said, I do think this draft has potential so please do persevere. Cabrils (talk) 01:32, 22 September 2026 (UTC)