Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Harleigh


 * 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 redirect to Doug Thompson (US political blogger), then delete as csd-r1. If the blogger ever gets notable enough for an article, leave me a note and I'll undelete the relevant history on this article. Until then, you can't merge things into nonexistent articles. - Bobet 09:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

George Harleigh

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No reliable sources to verify the information, barely a claim of notability. Cúchullain t/ c 21:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as nominator.--Cúchullain t/ c 21:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - no reliable sources showing notability. BlueValour 16:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Involved in politics is important.  --24.181.176.224 17:44, 29 April 2007 (UTC) — 24.181.176.224 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment The above anon has made few other edits besides this article and AfD.--Cúchullain t/ c 22:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Mr Harleigh was widely quoted before being found to not exist. Try a google search .  A google search does not make anything notable, but his main 'quote' had a lot of traction on the web.  There was even an email distribution from 'him' at one point. Jmcnamera 17:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Here is another quote from George: [hnn.us/blogs/archives/26/2005/10/]. The trouble is, these fake quotes are out there and they rarely get corrected. Jmcnamera 17:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * keep per points brought up by Jmcnamera, mark as stub. This article was created Nov 2006 and has stayed in stub condition for 6 months, but I can see the possibility of it becoming informative. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 16:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Or Merge and Redirect to Doug Thompson if he (the real person) is notable.  How can an imaginary internet sockpuppet, who only appeared for a time on a blog forum that hardly anyone ever heard of, be more notable than the "hand" that operates the sockpuppet.  Not that there are no notable "real" puppets: Kermit the Frog and Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog are far more well known than their operators.  An inactive imaginary internet blogging sockpuppet of the past is no where near that level of notability.  --T-dot (Talk | contribs) 18:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * merge and redirect to Doug Thompson sounds like a good idea too. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 19:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Is that the same Doug Thompson as the blogger? The Thompson we have an article on is a retired Canadian politician. If they're not the same then a merge and redirect is of course inappropriate.--Cúchullain t/ c 19:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * reply: Woops - didn't realize there was another Doug Thompson out there politically active in Canada.  If it is decided that our Doug Thompson is notable enough to have an article himself, then we'll have to make a disambiguation page and make sure that George Harleigh redirects to the correct one - perhaps Doug Thompson (US political blogger) or something to that effect.  --T-dot (Talk | contribs) 21:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes, it refers to the US blogger, not the Canadian politician. To T-dot's mention of real puppets, 'George Harleigh' received quite a bit of press for over a year - it was not just on one site.  If you google him now, the first block of hits are comments about his being a fake, but past that you start seeing quite a few places that still refer to him as real and quote him. Jmcnamera 20:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Doug Thompson (US political blogger) per T-dot ~ G1ggy!  blah, blah, blah 06:04, 2 May 2007 (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.