Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Harlamon


 * 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. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

George Harlamon


Questionable notability. Importance seems confined to local area. ghits: NMChico24 00:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep I disagree. Harlamon took over the reigns of a key Connecticut city during the height of racial strife. He was a major player in Waterbury, CT history. It should be noted that Wikipedia cites numerous Waterbury Ct mayors when went to jail. It should include an entry about an accomplished  mayor who was later elected to the city's Hall of Fame. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Boston2bronx (talk • contribs).
 * Keep one reference in the NYTimes and this article more than likely mentions him too. I wouldn't expect much to turn up on the web for a politician who retired in 1970. Demiurge 01:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep article needs cleanup, but is clearly notable. While all small-city mayors are not normally notable, this one IS, by evidence of the numerous sources and clear assertions to notability in the text of the article.  If someone in the Waterbury, CT area could head on down to the library to find news or book references to this guy it would be even better, since finding web-references on a long-retired (but certainly notable) politician can be tough. --Jayron 32  02:12, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sufficiently notable, as per Jayron32.   Buck  ets  ofg  14:57, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and clean up.__ Seadog ♪ 15:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - 60 Hits on Google Arctic-Editor 15:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep He had a notable history and references from WP:RS demonstrate that. --Oakshade 16:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep: I saw that he was local and questioned the keeps, but after reading it and all the references on him, he seems relatively notable. The article just needs to delve in on his term as mayor, since that seems to be what's notable. --Wizardman 17:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - I think that he's notable enough to have an article, but it needs more focus on him being mayor. The NYT articles are definitely a reliable source. 0L1   Talk   Contribs  18:45 25/11/2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable. Everyking 11:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's not easy to get good information about local history, especially from the pre-web era. The New York Times articles appear to be reliable sources, so the article should be maintainable. EdJohnston 22:42, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, The New York Times is definitely reliable. He has some notability in him and just needs some cleanup. --Ter e nce Ong (C 08:37, 27 November 2006 (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.