Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harold H. Thompson


 * 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. --MCB 04:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Harold H. Thompson
Not notable prisoner and robber with <200 unique google hits. I see no purpose for this article other than to promote his webpage and attract attention to his plight. The page also "borrows' heavily from his webpage, and so is either vanity, copyvio, or of questionable verafiability. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim   01:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Rewrite, or Delete without prejudice(i.e. a better article on the subject might be acceptable). '"Harold Thompson" prisoner' gets 1440 ghits, almost all relevant, and he seems to have some notability among various anarchist and activist sites, so an article on this guy is borderline acceptable, IMO. However, the text of the current article is cribbed wholesale from his website. Copyvio is probably not a problem (these are anarchists!) but verifiability is, so pretty much the whole article would have to be scrapped and rebuilt from better sources... --Aim Here 01:52, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Could you provide dif's for the 1440 google hits?I get about 300 unique google hits for "Harold Thompson" prisoner'  Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim
 * Here you go Dlohetc..  Marcus22 20:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Does not seem awfully notable, probably could use a major rewrite James68 11:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete In its current form, this does not make a case for verifiable notability. Eusebeus 13:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep if and only if verifiable sources are found. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 16:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Not Proven I failed to spot anything in the article that was notable in the case. If as suggested it is referred by others above (good discussion!) then why isn't it in the article - more so, and particularly why isn't it in the first paragraph? What implications are there for other people - if it doesn't even e.g. challenge one single point of law what's it doing here? --Mike 10:39, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, nothing particularly notable about him being a murderer, a problem prisoner, a jailhouse lawyer, a zine editor, or an anarchist. NawlinWiki 15:40, 31 October 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.