Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom 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 keep. (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000^(talk) 16:49, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Cohen[edit]

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

Unremarkable academic and author. Fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:NPROF. 3 out of 6 references are to books authored by Cohen himself. RadioFan (talk) 02:39, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:49, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:49, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:49, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:50, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sufficiently notable academic author. The collection he edited on Derrida has 1035 holdings in libraries a/c WorldCat. Several other books have over 400 each. This is high for academic works in any subject. DGG ( talk ) 20:50, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 08:17, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Reviews of his work: Comparative Literature[1][2], Film Criticism[3], Atlantis[4], English: The Journal of the English Association[5], ArtUS[6], Oxford Literary Review[7], MLN[8].--Colapeninsula (talk) 10:35, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:09, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- lots of reviews and many books by major presses (Cambridge, Routledge, U. Minn.). -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 01:22, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Book reviews, large library holdings, major publishers. --Randykitty (talk) 10:42, 20 January 2014 (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.