Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erik Boheman


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 00:39, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Erik Boheman

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable politician (✉→ BWilkins ←✎) 10:00, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep He seems to meet WP:POLITICIAN as a former member of the Riksdag. He is also mentioned in the Nationalencyklopedin . Funny  Pika! 10:31, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per FunnyPika - meets criterion 1 of WP:POLITICIAN. The man was not just a member of the Riksdag, but also Speaker of the First Chamber for five years. In addition, a biographical entry in Nationalencyclopedin means that he meets WP:GNG. --bonadea contributions talk 12:07, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - definitely meets WP:POLITICIAN, completely incomprehensible nomination, please read the article and relevance criteria before nominating. Tomas e (talk) 13:12, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as noted the person clearly meets WP:POLITICIAN. Also of note is that they were Swedish Ambassador to the UK, France and the USA. While a recent request for comment came to no consensus on automatic notability of Ambassadors, it's quite plausible that he achieved significant coverage in those roles. Add to that the fact that he was at one point a serious contender to be UN Secretary General and we do seem to have a senior noteworthy politician. Valenciano (talk) 18:54, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. jonkerz ♠talk 18:06, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Member of a national legislature and former senior diplomat and civil servant. Clearly notable. Should never have been nominated. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:51, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. I am as puzzled as Tomas e above. Didn't the nominator read the article? --Hegvald (talk) 04:51, 12 June 2013 (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.