Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark J. Cohen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 no consensus/keep. Cool Hand Luke 20:07, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mark J. Cohen

Mark J. Cohen (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

non notable biography RedShiftPA (talk) 01:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Agreed fails wp:bio Pharmboy (talk) 01:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Change delete to neutral More content and cites were added, still is borderline but likely ok under 'Wikipedia is not a paper enclopedia' catchall. Pharmboy (talk) 16:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Just because he inspired a notable cartoonist does not mean he himself is notable. Danae could tell you that. --Blanchardb-MeMyEarsMyMouth-timed 01:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
  • There's a tiny bit of useful and notable info in each article. Merge and Redirect Mark J. Cohen, Mark B. Cohen, Florence Cohen, and David Cohen into Cohen Family (Philidelphia). --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
    • There is no indication that Mark J. Cohen is related to the other two Cohens currently being discussed at AfD. --Blanchardb-MeMyEarsMyMouth-timed 02:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete no evidence of notability and no sourcing for that matter. Montco (talk) 02:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep He seems to have been notable enough. Comics Buyers Guide, Penstuff and Cartoon World seem to have had five different articles focusing on him between 1996 and 2000, as this link shows (page 115). I added some information to the article that I could glean from the Web. If he was just a collector, I don't think that would be notable enough, but he also was in business representing the artists and apparently wrote about comics (Whiting calls him a "respected historian" of comics, although I haven't found anything written by Cohen.) It's not the strongest case, or the strongest article, but on balance, seems worth keeping. Noroton (talk) 02:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep for the reasons given by Noroton above. Further, he seems to be apolitical and is no relation to Philadelphia Cohens, who seem to be the primary source of RedShiftPA's grievance against the prominent Philadelphia Democratic family. User: Zulitz 11:07, 18 Dec 2007
    • Comment User:Zulitz wrote and did much of the significant editing for this article --RedShiftPA (talk) 07:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
  • ... which is irrelevant in terms of discounting Zulitz' opinion, although it's nice to know the creator of the article knows about the deletion discussion. Noroton (talk) 01:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Doesn't meet standards of WP:BIO. Just because this article is apolitical doesn't make it notable.--RedShiftPA (talk) 04:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Closing admin should note that RedshiftPA is the nominator. Nominators generally don't also vote in a separate spot on the off chance that their votes are counted twice. Still assuming good faith. Just saying ... :) Noroton (talk) 01:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep for reasons given above and in dubio... --Arcanios (talk) 10:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and tag for proper citation to be added (Noroton has shown it's out there); pace Noroton's "just a collector", major collectors who provide desirable pieces for public exhibitions tend to be considered a notable part of the art world. --Paularblaster (talk) 13:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I don't know anything at all about comics or cartoons, and not enough about art. I defer to Paularblaster about how notable collectors are considered. Cohen's collections, for what it's worth, have had years-long tours of various museums.Noroton (talk) 01:12, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep for reasons above. Mykej (talk) 18:01, 18 December 2007 (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.