Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael S. Berman

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:44, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Michael S. Berman

[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)

Non-notable lobbyist. The article relies only on primary sources and has been tagged for this since 2008. Reason is there are no reliable secondary sources covering the guy. Central and Adams (talk) 06:11, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and United States of America. Central and Adams (talk) 06:11, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable lobbyist - neither of the two sources in the article passes GNG. There's another political Michael Berman who got an obit in the LA Times, but I don't think they're the same guy. SportingFlyer T·C 13:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Minnesota and Washington, D.C.. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:43, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Hill is a reliable independent secondary source. Kablammo (talk) 07:36, 28 July 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.