Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geoffrey Cohen (nom de plume)


 * 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   Merge to Jewdas. Black Kite 00:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Geoffrey Cohen (nom de plume)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

As far as I can tell, this article is a reference to a person quoted in a few insignificant blog posts. It is written in a jokey, non-NPOV style, and may in fact be entirely a joke. It is linked only from a small number of articles by the same authors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gacohen (talk • contribs) 23 November 2009  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

Keep&Merge. Not sure if I'm advocating two mutually exclusive things here. Obviously this article has been written by someone from this group but the stylistic problems you highlight can be amended by other editors. Geoffrey Cohen (nom de plume) meets the notability criteria, in my point of view, due to the fact that he was the subject of an interview in a British national paper - The Times (or a blog thereof still under Times editorial control). He's also been interviewed in the Jewish Chronicle and the Jerusalem Post. In fact the Jewish Chronicle named Geoffrey Cohen/Jewdass as 67th most powerful Jew in Britain in 2008. It mightn't say a lot for British-Jewish ethnic power, but clearly this character/group is sufficiently notable to be kept. However, I would suggest that this article be merged with Jewdas as they are synonyms of each other. Freekra (talk) 15:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge to Jewdas. Freekra says it all. Fences  &amp;  Windows  23:37, 7 December 2009 (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.