Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Cohn


 * 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   keep. -- Cirt (talk) 00:48, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Steve Cohn

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Not notable - holds an obscure local Democratic party office.Sylvain1972 (talk) 14:09, 23 July 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Y not? 00:23, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep.  His notability is indicated in his RS coverage, and a number of such articles over a number of years are clearly indicated in the article.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * Relisting - syntax was broken, so this AfD fell through the cracks. -- Y not? 00:23, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:47, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Dude's not the most famous, but enough third party cites over the years tip me to saying "keep" with Epeefleche. --Quartermaster (talk) 02:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete A collection of very local pieces of coverage about very much a local politician does not make for "significant coverage". And we have to bear in mind that he fails - by a wide margin - the notability standards that the community has set for persons of his profession.--Mkativerata (talk) 02:29, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as per WP:POLITICIAN. The subject has obviously received "significant press coverage". Guoguo12  --Talk--   16:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per significant media coverage, including treatment in "the fifth most-widely circulated daily newspaper in the United States". Peter Karlsen (talk) 18:06, 6 September 2010 (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.