Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Betsy Z. Cohen


 * 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The result was withdrawn and draftified by agreement of the nominator and the article creator. BD2412 T 06:22, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Betsy Z. Cohen

 * – ( View AfD View log )

There is something very peculiar about the way the referencing is framed in this article. They are all opaquely within an archive framework, making it harder to identify immediately the press release and PR nature of the references. In the first dozen or saw references I have found only one that is about Cohen and is in a reliable source and is significant coverage. This is WP:ADMASQ with a good smattering of WP:BOMBARD. All we see here is Cohen's resumé. If she has inherent notability we need to see what that might be.Otherwise she just appears be a WP:ROTM investor doing what investors do.

In summary it's a very capable advert. Fiddle  Faddle  19:06, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  Fiddle   Faddle  19:06, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:32, 6 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment: In discussions with the major contributor I have determined with them that the opacity of the references has been due to a misunderstanding. Fiddle   Faddle  23:15, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: Further discussions with who is the main contributor have shown me that the correct course of action is for me to withdraw my nomination and ask that this be closed as Draftify so that they may work on the many faults in referencing, and thus in the prose that the current references do not really support. Because they have a declared WP:COI they cannot work on this as an article. It can then be resubmitted for review and be accepted or not on its future merits. I do not believe I am entitled to close this discussion myself since I initiated it, so ask for a Speedy close in this manner.  Fiddle   Faddle  06:01, 7 April 2021 (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.