Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ayn Rand and the history of philosophy


 * 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. Valley2 city ‽ 06:13, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Ayn Rand and the history of philosophy
I am putting this article up for deletion. Even if it were well-written and properly sourced (neither of which applies here), the subject is insufficiently notable. There are no articles David Hume and the history of philosophy or Wittgenstein and the history of philosophy so why should this apply to Rand? Particularly as there is considerable evidence she neither understood nor even read any philosophy. It's about time we took a stand against the proliferation of articles about this figure who is revered, without reason, by a multitude of fanatics who flock to Wikipedia from Rand newsgroups. End of sermon. Peter Damian (talk) 13:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Seconded. Nice find. An absurdity and a disgrace. Might as well create the redlinks you mentioned if we're going to keep this. But your examples are too generous. I'd equate Ayn Rand and the history of philosophy with J. K. Rowling and the history of philosophy or perhaps Rush Limbaugh and the history of philosophy. --Down2theRhythm (talk) 13:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment So the title sucks! However, demonstrating that " and the history of philosophy" ends up in a redlink does not mean much.  There are a number of articles about the philosophy of David Hume or the philosophy of Ludwig Wittgenstein.  I'm not sure what the point is of equating Ayn Rand with J.K. Rowling or Rush Limbaugh.   However, Ayn Rand is a philosopher whose work continues to be studied, and perhaps this belongs in another of the Wikipedia articles about her. Mandsford (talk) 15:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * For your information Rand acquired a large cult following and the royalties from her best-selling romantic novels funded "research" by like-minded individuals. But this is not serious academic work, and no proper academic philosopher has ever considered her writing as anything more than a joke.  Hope that clears up any misconceptions.  With best wishes Peter Damian (talk) 15:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note also that Googling Harry Potter + Philosophy gives very similar results! Peter Damian (talk) 14:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong delete for additional reasons. Wiki is littered with sub-sub-articles about Rand, Objectivism and philosophy.  It's hard to know how many, as they don't necessarily link to each other.  Certainly we have an article on Rand, a separate article on her Objectivism, another on criticisms, separate articles on Objectivist metaphysics, Objectivist epistemology, Objectivist ethics, Objectivist politics and the Objectivist movement.  I don't believe Wikipedia treats any major philosopher in this way.  It's an epidemic and a disservice to readers.KD Tries Again (talk) 15:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC)KD Tries Again
 * Weak Delete: Ayn Rand is at best a footnote in the history of philosophy. However, Her relationship with and understanding of other philosophers and philosophies should probably be covered somewhere. I'm inclined to believe this shouldn't have its own article as it seems a little hyper-specialized, but I am not totally convinced. TallNapoleon (talk) 17:54, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Is it not persuasive that we don't have separate articles on the relationship major philosophers have with the history of the subject? By all accounts, Rand's engagement with philosophical scholarship was slight.  Her acknowledgment of Aristotle is well known, and there are a handful of comments on Nietzsche and Kant.  That's all.  Compare the voluminous, scholarly engagements with philosophical history by, e.g., Hegel, Derrida, Bertrand Russell, Deleuze, Dummett, Heidegger, not to mention Aristotle (random choices); these don't warrant separate articles.KD Tries Again (talk) 18:55, 28 March 2009 (UTC)KD Tries Again
 * Comment. Do the editors voting Support support deleting or keeping the article? To me it's unclear. Pburka (talk) 19:25, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Strong Delete, for all the reasons noted above. Some of this is blatantly opinionated and Rand herself should not be used as a source in regards what Kant (or anyone) actually said. But, move some of it to the regular Ayn Rand page, which needs improvement anyway.--Levalley (talk) 00:25, 2 April 2009 (UTC)LeValley
 * Comment:  Changed to delete, thanks Phurka :). TallNapoleon (talk) 20:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. This can all be covered in the Objectivism article. Pburka (talk) 19:25, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: while I agree that Ayn Rand is no more a philosopher than the guy who wrote "Who took my cheese", IF people have written more than a couple of independent, published third party sources about Ayn Rand's place in the history of Philosophy, AND people can make a case for a fork from Ayn Rand on size, then this is a legitimate topic. Sadly, I think both these lines have been crossed, but I would like a look at the references.  After the AfD is decided this then needs to be moved to a different title: "Person X and the History of Philosophy" is neither a standard or encyclopedic title.  T L Miles (talk) 19:33, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong delete for the various reasons above.--Snowded (talk) 21:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, or perhaps a slight merge to another article on Ayn Rand or on Objectivism. This article's title strongly implies that Rand played some sort of pivotal role in the history of philosophy, when in fact it simply describes the philosophers who influenced her. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 23:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment All of you obviously joined Wikipedia long, long after it was widely known as "that website with lots of articles on Ayn Rand". (You can thank the Rambot for ridding us of that reputation. It added tens of thousands of articles created from US census material, which made Wikipedia into "that website with lots of articles about places in the US no one has ever heard of -- or cares about.") -- llywrch (talk) 22:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge; redirect to Objectivism (Ayn Rand) which seems to be philosophy. pohick (talk) 22:28, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge into Objectivism (Ayn Rand) as a major section titled Philosophical influences on Rand. This article has sections on the influences of Aristotle, Nietzsche, and Kant, which Objectivism (Ayn Rand) does not. -65.246.126.130 (talk) 21:28, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete not worth merging, everything is already covered and the title is not a useful point of access. DGG (talk) 07:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per DGG. J Readings (talk) 12:21, 1 April 2009 (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.