Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicholas Griffin (philosopher)

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 keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:47, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nicholas Griffin (philosopher)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

~~Not notable. Seems promotional Very Average Editor (talk)~~ 07:21, 25 June 2023 (UTC) (sock strike Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC))[reply]

Delete As nominator. Also worth noting, most of the contributors are a sock master and his socks. Very Average Editor (talk)07:42, 25 June 2023 (UTC) (sock strike Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC))[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 07:46, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. "Canada Research Chair in Philosophy" should be an automatic pass of [{WP:NPROF]]. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 07:56, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:45, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article is outdated, as he has retired [1]. The reviews of his solo-author books tip me in the direction of a "keep" by WP:AUTHOR. For Relative Identity, we have at least [2][3][4][5], and for Russell's Idealist Apprenticeship there's at least [6][7]). For The Cambridge Companion to Bertrand Russell, which he edited, a quick search finds [8][9][10][11]. XOR'easter (talk) 16:55, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:AUTHOR and the many published reviews of his authored books. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:19, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I was leaning in this direction, but now there's even more in the article than what I found, so I'm content to say that WP:AUTHOR is met. XOR'easter (talk) 17:00, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Ironically, the nominator has been blocked as a sockpuppet. Maybe this is cause for a speedy close? —David Eppstein (talk) 19:48, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No objection from me. XOR'easter (talk) 20:45, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep - nom. was from a sock, and consensus clear per WP:SNOW. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.