Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cohen crime family

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 Los Angeles crime family. There is certainly an overwhelming desire for this to not be kept as a standalone article, that much is clear. Closing as no consensus would not be in keeping with that desire. A delete decision would not preclude anyone from updating any proposed merge target, but it would remove the current title from being a redirect. As the List of Cohen crime family members is already slated to be merged to the LA crime family article, any remaining sourced information from this article should be merged there as well. I note that there is nothing stopping anyone from adding any sourced material to Mickey Cohen as well. UtherSRG (talk) 18:44, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cohen crime family[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Article is a largely unsourced, largely OR compendium of material. Sure there are sources, but all deal with irrelevancies and side topics and none, zero, even attempt to address the subject of the article, the supposed "Cohen crime family" No sourcing is offered to indicate that such a "crime family" actually existed. In fact, if you look at the section called "Formation," you find that the formation of this supposed "crime family" is not described.

This article was merged into Mickey Cohen in 2019 but was recently unmerged. ~~I have no objection to merging in lieu of deletion,~~ but this article adds little if anything to the Cohen article due to its lack of useful sourcing.

Note that the realated article List of Cohen crime family members, which has zero sourcing, has been nominated for deletion on the same grounds. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Cohen crime family members Coretheapple (talk) 17:36, 13 September 2023 (UTC) nomination updated. Coretheapple (talk) 16:09, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Mickey Cohen per my nomination. Tuck this into that other article, as happened in 2019 with no objection until two days ago. Though this article doesn't add very much usable material to Cohen, a merge in lieu of deletion is harmless. Coretheapple (talk) 19:41, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Changing my !vote to Delete. There is no point to merging since there is no sourcing substantiating the existence of the article subject. A discussion of which article should be the merger target strikes me as unnecessary. Coretheapple (talk) 13:54, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Striking out to avoid giving the impression of a duplicate !vote. Just noting as nominator that I believe that delete iis preferable to merging. Coretheapple (talk) 13:39, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, California, and Nevada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:38, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep This is a major crime family with a storied history, in relation to both the Italian-American Mafia and Jewish-American organized crime. However, it is unclear how major, given the fact that much of it only alludes to Mickey Cohen himself. It certainly needs more detail and sources, but I believe it should be given the chance to add this. PickleG13 (talk) 23:07, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PickleG13 Can you please cite a single reliable secondary source that substantiates your statement that the "Cohen crime family" existed, much less that it was a "major crime family"? I have searched diligently and found not even a single source substantiating the existence of the subject of this article. Secondly, the article was created in 2015 and tagged in 2019. Ample opportunity has been given to source this article. Coretheapple (talk) 01:13, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

*Merge List of Cohen crime family members into this one. — Maile (talk) 00:04, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: That does not make sense. Since this article is proposed for deletion, your suggestion implies that article should also be deleted. You cannot keep your cake for later and eat it at the same time. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 22:21, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Los Angeles crime family under the section about Jack Dragna. This so-called family appears to have arisen as a result of a falling out between Dragna and Mickey Cohen when Bugsy Siegel was killed. Also, both Siegel and Cohen were working for the New York mafia, so their West Coast operations is more like a branch office. Follow the chain of command to the top, Cohen wasn't the boss, just Siegel's lieutenant and bodyguard. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 22:27, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is a Keep and two different Merge targets that have been proposed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Mickey Cohen per nom. I am also not finding independent confirmation that a "family" under this name (or Siegel crime syndicate) existed, and WP is not a reliable source. Cohen surely existed, and the activities regarding the remnants of the West Coast Lansky-Siegel operation that Cohen controlled and utilized to do battle with the Los Angeles crime family can be folded into his article, minus the background information (it's only there to pad the article) which can already be found under Jewish-American organized crime, Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel. Compare for example New York divorce coercion gang, another descriptive Jewish gang name that cannot be found in sources, but is kept in lieu of having the article at Mendel Epstein (the ringleader). Here, the situation will be the reverse—but having 2 articles in any case is not sensible. StonyBrook _babble 15:11, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting in case there are more opinions about the two different Merge target articles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:53, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment re Liz's comment in relisting, note that I have changed my !vote to ~~delete~~ as merger would serve no useful purpose. If there is no consensus on a merger target, that does not detract from the utter lack of sourcing for the very existence of the article subject. Coretheapple (talk) 13:57, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like this is a duplicate vote. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:02, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing what I believe is your concern. Also I am puzzled by your comment about a possible no consensus close, which I believe would be tantamount to keeping. If only one !vote is for keep, the consensus is not to keep. Coretheapple (talk) 13:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think Liz was only trying to encourage a stronger attempt at achieving consensus. Simply pointing out that there is currently no consensus about what to do with an article does not imply that it is worth keeping, only that the default result is that it will remain, for now. StonyBrook _babble 17:38, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But that's my point. There is a clear consensus at this time that it not remain. Coretheapple (talk) 18:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As a standalone article. As of now, there is no clear consensus to make the content therein completely disappear, which is what happens as a result of the deletion process. As stated above, I am in favor of including the general information in the Mickey Cohen article. However, that does not mean I agree that there ever was a Cohen crime family per se. It just means that I think the people who worked for and with Cohen should be included in his article in some form, whether via prose or a list. StonyBrook _babble 18:33, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's my feeling as well. Perhaps my !vote should be delete or merge somewhere. I don't much care where. In January 2020 I merged this into Mickey Cohen, where it remained until a few weeks ago. In any event at the current time the consensus is clearly not to keep the article in its current form, and a "no consensus" would be a de facto "keep." Coretheapple (talk) 19:10, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I try, subtlety, to nudge the discussion along, Coretheapple. I'm trying to read the room. THe primary thing a closer needs to avoid is introducing their own opinion in the closure. Also, "No consensus" simply means that there is no agreement in the discussion it doesn't equate to "Keep". I've seen discussions closed as No consensus return for future visit to AFD, it's more likely than when they close as Keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:49, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Agree with nominator that merger serves no useful purpose. If you must merge for some reason, merge to Mickey Cohen. 108.176.17.98 (talk) 00:02, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Aside from one editor advocating Keep, it looks like opinion is divided between Delete and Merge which might result in a No consensus closure.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:06, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the entire topic - there being this crime family is dubious, and appears to be original research.Cortador (talk) 13:01, 5 October 2023 (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.