Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Objectivist metaphysics
I tend to see Rand's philosophy as somewhat of a |fringe position, unoriginal to the extent that it's right, and wrong to the extent that it's original.  Rand and her followers' vehemence in judgments on their critics tended to diminish her ideas' chances of being taken seriously as well.  Any trepidation I'd have about such articles comes not from the fact that they rehash Rand, but that Rand doesn't merit that depth of coverage.That said, she acquired enough of a following that there has come into being a small industry of academics who seek to rehabilitate the reputation of Rand's ideas.  And any idea about Rand's thought is only worthwhile to the extent that it communicates the substance of Rand's thought.  And to the extent that there is a scope of objectivist opinion, that itself is worth coverage, given that the core of Randian objectivism seems to be to claim that reason dictates a single correct answer to every question.  I am not prepared to endorse the deletion of encyclopedia articles on the epistemology, ethics, or political philosophy of Rand and her followers; she was not a ''major'' philosopher, but she is a ''well known'' philosopher.  The rest seems a content dispute beyond our bailiwick
— User:Ihcoyc, 16:41, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:FRINGE (Wikipedia:Fringe theories)