Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bryan Caplan

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep Karmafist 06:32, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bryan Caplan

Caplan is an associate professor, who wrote a few articles, and has a number of opinions. He certainly isn't notable. --Jason Gastrich 04:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

• Strong delete. Per nom. --Jason Gastrich 04:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - "Austrian economists have praised him as one of their more knowledgeable and interesting critics" - Also another Randroid being AfD'd in bad faith. Ruby 04:10, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy keep; nomination made in bad faith. --keepsleeping quit your job! slack off! 04:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy keep, nomination made in bad faith; Caplan is a well-known libertarian and economist, widely published in professional journals in the political, philosophical, and economic realm. - WarriorScribe 04:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep. While I agree this was a nom done in bad faith, I don't necessarily see the notability in this prof. Crunch 04:38, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep There are obvious WP:POINT issues here but let's try to deal with each article on its own merits. In this case, reasonable Google Scholar results on "Bryan Caplan" Dlyons493 Talk 04:46, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep → P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 05:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Yet another bad faith nomination/WP:POINT violation from Gastrich. Guettarda 06:12, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep bad faith nomination. Very bad faith. Mark K. Bilbo 06:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep this guy doesn't look that noteworthy, but squeaks by.--T. Anthony 07:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Very bad faith nomination. Notability is there. --† Ðy§ep§ion † 07:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Speedy Keep if that makes sense. Barely notable enough, bad faith nomination. Grandmasterka 10:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep seems notable and it does seem these noms are in bad faith. --Bduke 11:21, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep - about 100k google hits. --Pierremenard 12:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:POINT and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jason Gastrich Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 14:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak speedy keep per Grandmasterka (makes perfect sense to me!) --FloNight 16:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Durova 16:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above --kingboyk 18:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy keep Jim62sch 18:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - WP:POINT. Latinus 18:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep --NaconKantari (話)|(郵便) 18:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, bad faith nom, WP:POINT. MCB 22:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep as blatant violation of WP:POINT. Also, the nominator of this article has a currently ongoing RFC and his motives are clearly suspect. Cyde Weys 23:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Jason decided to make this us vs. them, and I choose them. --StuffOfInterest 01:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy keep. Notable scholar from George Mason with many publications. Amazing accomplishments for such a young man. Arbustoo 01:58, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - this guy is stongly connected to the two leading schools of libertarian economc thought - Mises AND Rand - and is respected by both. -Harvestdancer 02:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.