The "google hits test" is one of the most damaging and LEAST scholarly methods one finds used by some editors of wikipedia. it makes wikipedia shallow and is the cause of many inappropriate inclusions and exclusions in wikipedia texts and this article and the deletion of the "defender of the strong" for Hruska is a perfect example.
this is the term used in CQ (an authoritative biography source for members of Congress) from the late 1960's.
Google book search and Amazon A9 book search both turn up ZERO hits. The idea that he is "widely known" as a "Defender of the Strong" (capitalized!) when the only source one can turn up is a generalized allusion in one minor column in a 1968 New Republic is faintly ridiculous - particularly when a main point of the article is that he is best known for precisely the opposite (that is, defender of mediocrity). zafiroblue05 | Talk 21:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Anyway, the monicker makes little sense, or is a backhand insult: since when do "the Strong" particularly need defending? Patzer42 (talk) 18:38, 1 September 2008 (UTC)