Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthur W. Baron


 * 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 speedily deleted as the author has admitted this was a hoax intended to make a point for a Dartmouth College newspaper article. As a journalist myself, I can appreciate the misguided reasoning, but I strongly urge the authors to consider Wikipedia's policies before wasting our time. I won't block for this violation... but others might. FCYTravis 21:45, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Arthur W. Baron
NN bio, likely nonsense. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 04:28, 2 December 2005 (UTC) Delete. I made the page.--ProfDariusAlexander 06:34, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * No. An important figure in this sometimes cultish, but interesting field. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.170.237.159 (talk • contribs) 23:38, December 1, 2005
 * Keep. Known in jazz fusion circles, and published author on molecular economics.--ProfDariusAlexander 04:41, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wikipedia is one of the most ambitious of all humanist expressions. Baron is a brave visionary who pushes his controversial ideas to achieve the maximum benefit for compendiums like ours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.170.237.159 (talk • contribs) 23:45, December 1, 2005
 * Speedy Delete as A7. Peyna 04:46, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is all very interesting and I've found other sources outside Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.12.117.9 (talk • contribs) 23:49, December 1, 2005
 * Cleanup. Just needs to be tidied up a bit. Quite a bit. Some of the facts on molecular economics are wrong. I suggest you consult Meir Cohn's book for more details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.12.117.9 (talk • contribs) 23:49, December 1, 2005
 * Delete This is just a non-notable person. Recommend a speedy delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.170.239.204 (talk • contribs) 23:51, December 1, 2005
 * Keep As much as I suspected this to be an NN, I was very unpleasantly surprised to find that there is a cult following behind this guy's work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.12.117.9 (talk • contribs) 23:52, December 1, 2005
 * A note to Mr. Baron: "sock-puppet" votes are discounted, and actually hurt the article's chances of surviving. Please stop.  You are wasting your time.  --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 05:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. As a student at Dartmouth College, I know that this is a real person.--AaronS 05:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * So what? I'm a real person, and I don't deserve an article, thank god.  In case you somehow didn't realize, there are standards of inclusion including notability and verifiability.  --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 05:18, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I am a real person too, do I get a Wikipedia article? Peyna 05:17, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You didn't write a book on molecular economics. This guy did. That's the difference. It's an important burgeoning new field. See this reference from: http://www.dartlog.net/2002/06/congratulations-mr-baron.php --AaronS 05:32, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Considering that Google indexes that website, it has not yet indexed that page, which suggests the creation date is false. Also, I highly doubt someone born in 1985 graduated from Dartmouth in 1998 and still contributes to a blog there. Peyna 05:36, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Also notice that the "reference" has a link for "comments" while the other postings at that time do not. Apparently such a feature was not added to the web page until a much later date.  I also find no evidence of any such award existing.  Nice try, but find something more productive to do with your time. Peyna 05:41, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * If you use Blogger, you know that that feature can be turned on and off at any time, for any post, depending on the author's wishes.--AaronS 05:44, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Google cache at the time of this posting shows the information was not on the page.  Google's cache is not 3 years out of date. Peyna 05:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Also see the Wayback Machine cache from October 2004 . Peyna 05:50, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The biographical information was false. He was born in 1977.--AaronS 05:38, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete this guy. There are 594 Google hits for Arthur Baron However, they are about an older musician who played with Duke Ellington not this guy. "Arthur Baron" molecular economics gets 0 Google results see  and given that he is 20, he wouldn't be expected to have made much of a contribution to the field. Delete this article although an article on the jazz guy might be another question. Capitalistroadster 05:18, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I am Art Baron and my friends the are assholes who did this page. Especially AaronS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.170.239.83 (talk • contribs) 00:51, December 2, 2005
 * Please. This must be User:Peyna.--AaronS 05:53, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Please review WP:NPA. Peyna 05:57, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I wasn't the one who made the personal attack.--AaronS 06:00, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete The Night Time is the Right Time...--64.12.117.9 06:03, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * This and have all the hallmarks of a university student hoax.  The mutually supporting articles and the inclusion of a purported reference are unusual.  But as per Capitalistroadster and Peyna, the articles do not withstand scrutiny.  The fact that Arthur W. Baron is a contributor to The Dartmouth Review, which AaronS is citing here as evidence, is also telling.  From all appearances, AaronS is in on the hoax, and this is a prank played on Mr Baron, by Review staffers, rather than by him.  Where imagination has particularly failed the perpetrator(s) is in the litany of comments in the AFD discussions offering personal testimony, stating that the article should be kept because it is "interesting", and claiming the existence of sources but not actually supplying them.  This is an age-old "keep our hoax" pattern.  Delete. Uncle G 06:22, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. Ungle G wins the Sherlock Holmes award. This was an experiment for an upcoming article in The Dartmouth Times Courant about Wikipedia as an effective reference.--129.170.237.98 06:26, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * If true, phooey. My wife and I and my neighbors frequently pick up and dispose of litter left on the sidewalk, but I hope someone isn't going to dump a load of Forest Green trash on my sidewalk just to see whether we really do. If you disrupted Wikipedia to illustrate a point then you're a bunch of inconsiderate jerks and I hope that when U. S. News and World Report finds out about they'll break the tie between you and Columbia in Columbia's favor. Pffffftttt! Dpbsmith (talk) 13:46, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete farcical attempt at humor and it's not even funny. Not even encyclopedic.--MONGO 06:34, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Preferably speedy as silly vandalism, though I'm not sure whether the chorus of sockpuppet stupidity above, including a supposed author request, is sufficient to justify that. --Last Malthusian 10:19, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nonsense. Gazpacho 10:43, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Zero Google hits for the guy except for what might be an ad for a performance, and certainly no references to his name in connection with molecular economics. 23skidoo 12:41, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as unverifiable. The reason I call it unverifiable is that Molecular economics, also on AfD, makes the mistake of citing a source, a 1999 book supposedly published by the University Press of New England entitled "Subjectivist Labornomics" by Arthur W. Baron.  Google books shows no hits on Subjectivist Labornomics and no hits on Arthur W. Baron. If this were an important theory and book, it is almost certain that a 1999 book itself or references to it would show up in Google Books. The University Press of New England's complete author/title index shows a book by Mary Baron entitled Wheat among Bones and one by Barron, Jonathan N on Jewish American Poetry but nothing resembling the cited book. Looks, sounds, feels, tastes and smells like a transparent hoax; the onus is on the contributor to show othersize. Dpbsmith (talk) 13:39, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per all the non-sockpuppet arguments above. Also comment to the person who states he is the subject of the article, which is a hoax by his friends - kudos for trying to help, but we must go through the process. You might also be a hoaxer, if you follow. KillerChihuahua 14:45, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination; socks --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 15:09, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. Doesn't meet WP:BIO. --W.marsh 15:25, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete - creator has admitted hoax. ESkog | Talk 15:34, 2 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete or speedy delete as vandalism: Block IP of contributor, as well.  It's authentic gibberish with a soupcon of moronia.  The creators should go get cans of spray paint and exercise their muse in Providence, not here. Geogre 15:48, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete, nn bio and hoax. WP:NOT a playground for bored rich college students. That's what SomethingAwful is for. :P RasputinAXP  talk contribs 16:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - Is this the most funny thing that these guys can come up with? Really? - Hahnchen 17:06, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete as non-notable biography. &mdash;  F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( TALK )  17:23, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete all these glowing tributes put me off. PatGallacher 17:50, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete This seems like complete and utter nonsense. Somehow economics, music, and string theory don't seem to mix. --Impaciente 18:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sock-puppets dance in Wiki-Hell. BD2412  T 18:19, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete and seconding the nomination to block IP of contributor. If this is indeed an effort by the Dartmouth Review to test Wikipedia then it shows callous indifference for the time and effort of volunteer editors. Durova 19:21, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BIO and my disdain for sock banter. PJM 19:49, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as hoax bordering on patent nonsense. Ifnord 21:28, 2 December 2005 (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.