Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shawn 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 delete. MBisanz ^talk 07:37, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shawn Cohen[edit]

Not notable. Contains links to Mr Cohen's commercial website and the like. My Notability banner was removed without comment, by a user name obviously created for the purpose (as was a bot's Orphaned banner). I've already removed Shawn Cohen spam from the article Ophthalmology. ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 18:22, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Subject seems to have some notability as the co-author of a few glaucoma related papers, specifically [1], [2],[3]74.69.39.11 (talk) 18:46, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment [4] is noteworthy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewcarovallmd (talk • contribs) 21:57, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The paper mentioned by Andrewcarovallmd above has only been cited twice, not really noteworthy when compared to the way highly influential work of researchers passing WP:PROF here typically is. Pete.Hurd (talk) 04:00, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, Andrewcarovallmd has been created exclusively to add this comment. My apologies if I am wrong, but the article looks very much like an advertisement to me. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 09:13, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~The article is from the AMA, who I do not believe accepts advertising.~~74.69.39.11 (talk) 11:42, 16 March 2009 (UTC) My bad.74.69.39.11 (talk) 13:32, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I meant the Wikipedia article. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 12:54, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:17, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
delete I see no evidence that he passes WP:PROF. Pete.Hurd (talk) 22:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Like Pete.Hurd, I could not find enough to establish notability under WP:PROF. Does not seem to pass WP:BIO either - news coverage not particularly impressive.--Eric Yurken (talk) 01:41, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I am Dr. Shawn Cohen. It was brought to my attention that this biography was made on my behalf, unknown to me. I did not solicit this Article or begin it. I am truly an Assistant Professor of Ophthalmology, at McGill University, dedicated to patient education on my area of expertise, specifically glaucoma.

In keeping with this goal, I have absorbed 100% of the costs to provide free access to up-to-date patient-centered information on glaucoma, cataracts and other diseases. The links on Super Eye Care are to external valuable sites that patients have evaluated as being very useful for them. Not all of my published works, or current projects, are available on the internet, for copyright reasons. As well, some of my National Committee memberships, are not publicly known and will not be seen on the internet.

My free link to a Messages or clinical pearls section is a list of vital tips, some of which have saved people from damage. My eBook can be downloaded for free. I have NO pharmaceutical advertising on my site. All the lecture dates given are for FREE public educational seminars for anyone who wishes to attend. Yes, I am a Professional Speaker and can be hired to coach and teach organizations but only because I have 13 years of University education to back up this expertise. I participate in free discussion boards, like Topix, to help address public concerns on glaucoma and I personally respond to all emails sent to me directly through my website. When I am alone with a patient I can help one person at a time. On the internet, I can relay this information to people I am unable to help in person.

If any material on this or other sites with my involvement are deemed inappropriate, please contact me directly and I will make sure that they are in keeping with the above highest standard. If Wikipedia will serve to allow me perpetuate a pure educational goal for glaucoma and eye care advocacy, I would be honored greatly for your support. I remain humbly dedicated to the needs of the public for their support in dealing with glaucoma and other eye diseases.70.27.246.47 (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)Shawn Cohen, MD[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 02:56, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete He certainly has published a lot but not much has been published about him. I'd be happy to swing the other way, however, if that can be remedied. Basket of Puppies 03:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- Ray^Talk 05:56, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not meet notability criteria. ~ Ciar ~ _{(Talk to me!)} 11:00, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
'Delete per the professor test. Eusebeus (talk) 20:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:PROF. JFW | T@lk 11:19, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.