Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samuel G. Havermale


 * 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. Mailer Diablo 13:27, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Samuel G. Havermale
Close, but I don't think shows sufficient notability. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 06:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Through and through the article, I can't find any assertion of notability, although it is not badly written. Fails WP:BIO in its current form. Alphachimp  talk  14:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * He is mentioned in almost every single volume of early Spokane history. He has an entire section of the city named for him.  I'd say that's awfully notable. Wjhonson 17:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak keep, seems locally notable. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 *  Speedy Strong Keep please see Don't delete historical persons based on modern tests, although I think Havermale meets any reasonable interpretation of notability. -- Wine Guy  Talk  23:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep implies that the nomination was made in bad faith. Please revisit your wording.  User:Zoe|(talk) 23:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I was unaware of that implication and certainly meant no offense; thanks for the correction. I'll watch my strongs and speedys from now on. -- Wine Guy  Talk  05:58, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way, the article is under-construction. So it's a bit pre-mature to AfD it :) Another historian forwarded to me today, an article on him, and I've linked it on the page, but haven't extracted all the data yet.  Maybe Zoe will upgrade her weak based on the new notability data. Wjhonson 06:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Wine Guy. -- Aguerriero  ( talk ) 21:55, 18 July 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.