Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Art Carden


 * 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 was   delete. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:43, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Art Carden

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable assistant professor. No books, A small number of articles, h index=7, and the most cited paper cited only 40 times -- a paper for which he was the junior author ), 21, 11  citations,  DGG ( talk ) 00:07, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Thanks for doing the research on his academic notability. I wrote all of the original Wikipedia article. I think his notability arises from a conjunction of his academic achievement and the fact that he's been widely published in popular media, including having a Forbes column, appearing in video interviews, plus publications in many libertarian news and media outlets. I would agree that purely on the strength of academic publications, he would be non-notable (as of now). Vipul (talk) 16:34, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. For a pop economist he hasn't yet notched up enough cites on GS. Too early. Xxanthippe (talk) 10:51, 28 January 2014 (UTC).
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:49, 2 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Even considering the handful of media appearances, he doesn't yet pass WP:PROF in my opinion. Someone not using his real name (talk) 22:48, 7 February 2014 (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.