Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Chambers (economist)

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. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:02, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

David Chambers (economist)[edit]

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

Article is an unreferenced BLP about a subject who appears to have not received significant coverage in third party, reliable, and non-trivial sources. A Google search [1] yielded none that I can find. (In my opinion, [2] and a couple other more trivial sources the Google search found do not count as third party sources because he is employed by the sources). Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 19:25, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. IDEAS Repec lists only one working paper of his, so he doesn't seem to be very productive as an economist. I don't think he's notable per WP:ACADEMIC. As for third-party sources: Could he be the David Chambers mentioned here? --bender235 (talk) 07:06, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
While that's possible (I can't find any real information about a "David Chambers" economist running in a general election...see my search), I don't really see that that source is non-trivial either...it doesn't really tell me much about him (assuming this subject is who it refers to) other than he ran for an elected position and his general political stance. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 15:14, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 15:23, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:15, 26 April 2011 (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.