Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Cohen

Simon Cohen

Simon Cohen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am bringing this article to AfD to hopefully resolve an issue raised by Deborahjay at Talk:Simon Cohen#PR activity is not activism. The subject of the article has worked in PR, and most of the sources cited appear to be a result of his efforts to promote himself and his businesses. Does this make him notable? I'm not sure. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:42, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

• Comment his coverage appears to be either trivial (his own Facebook page) or related to Global Tolerance. A redirect, possibly to Global Tolerance (PR firm) would be ideal, but no target page exists and this page isn't suitable for a rename to that location. Power~enwiki (talk) 17:53, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
• Keep He is in PR, and the article about him has been edited by at least one person who knows him personally, as has been disclosed by that person. But he is also a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, which for me suffices for notability. He may be good at making himself notable because of his professional skills, but the criterion is "notability", and he seems to meet that criterion. Whether you got to be notable partly or even entirely by self-promotion is beside the point. Paris Hilton was "famous for being famous", remember, and her notability no doubt involved the work of a lot of PR pros. As you see, there is a Wikipedia article about her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Person54 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 26 June 2017 (UTC)‎
• Delete - WP is not a platform for activists or the promotion of same. ^{Atsme📞📧} 00:34, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Try doing a search on ~activist just the way you see it here and take note how many activists show up in the results.  — Myk Streja ^(who?) 01:24, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

• Keep - He acted in good faith as a promoter of social and ethical awareness in business practices. The fact that he had a company that handled the public relations for so many high level activists does not take away from his core beliefs: it simply gave him a larger platform. The article is slow going, but it is going. The AfD is premature. Discussion on how to de-emphasize Global Tolerance was just getting under way in the talk page. Perhaps an Under-Construction tag would have been a good idea.  — Myk Streja ^(who?) 01:24, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
• Comment As some of you may know, I published the first draft of the article, which is also my first article contribution on Wikipedia. Before doing that, I read most of what I could find on instructions, a lot on manuals of styles, guidelines, best practices and I used my own judgment and concluded that the subject is notable enough for WP. I followed more experienced Wikipedians advice on how to best go about creating an article when you have a COI, which suggested I create a draft for approval and disclose my COI. I have gotten so much help from editors from the very start, removing wording that’s promoting of the subject, altering the undue weight and increasing a neutral point of view. If my first draft failed to explain the notability of the subject that is my fault entirely, but I think the article is still taking shape, and I’m learning with it. I’ve been hoping to create a really great article, trying to add what I was considering to be relevant information, but maybe I have focused on the wrong things and should instead have aimed to remove and rewrite info. It’s not so easy to know once a draft is ready, or when an article is good enough. As a learning editor, I can only compare to other pages and the notability of other subjects on Wikipedia. And I think the subject is relevant, having spoken on one of the most popular radios in the UK regularly for two years, facilitating interfaith conversation and lifting social change-makers in the media, giving away his company, and speaking at many global events, and I’m hoping to be able to edit and further improve the article. MatildeZ (talk) 15:08, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

I made this suggestion on the TP of MatildeZ which basically suggests moving the article to draft space. ^{Atsme📞📧} 17:03, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

• Keep - I have history with this article, as on 4 May, in my third week as an AfC reviewer I accepted the draft. That was followed by a range of comments from other AfC folk on that accept and a flurry of activity on the article by a range of New Page Patrollers who carried out quite extensive cleanup, and I felt it appropriate to apologise for being too hasty in accepting the article into the main namespace. All respect to the editors helping with the COI editing. I can empathise with anyone with edit fatigue. Perhaps part of the issue here is the amount of edits being proposed via the talk page, and for that reason I think Atsme's suggestion of moving the article back to draft has merit. In terms of the AfD though, the reason I have said keep is that I believe the subject clearly meets WP:GNG and any discussion of the content of the article is irrelevant to the notability question (WP:NNC). To say that the article shouldn't be included in Wikipedia because the article is about someone skilled in the art of self-promotion is a flawed argument IMHO. The article seems well referenced and verifiable. That we don't like the article isn't a reason to delete (WP:IDONTLIKEIT). Any justification to delete must be framed in terms of which Wikipedia policy the article isn't compatible with, and I am not seeing that here. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:20, 27 June 2017 (UTC)