Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Bohm (journalist)


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 19:25, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Michael Bohm (journalist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence encyclopedic--Jürgen Klinsmann1990 (talk) 19:14, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2017 January 17.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 20:41, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. He did get one major profile (WSJ) but otherwise I don't see anything except passing mentions. One good source is not enough to make him pass WP:NBIO. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 23:37, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 03:04, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 03:04, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 03:04, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 03:04, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 03:04, 18 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete as clear advertising alone, no convincing parts of an article since there's nothing beyond claims of significance. SwisterTwister   talk  03:18, 18 January 2017 (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.