Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry George Galt

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. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 21:39, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harry George Galt[edit]

[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)

WP:BIO is not satisfied for a lower-level British colonial official killed by a disgruntled local. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:29, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 22:31, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 22:31, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uganda-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 22:32, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - needs more sources but the fact that it's still being written about a century later and that a street is named after him shows notability. Sowny (talk) 09:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:BASIC is satisfied per WP:NEXIST. See the Journal of African History, for example. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:48, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Seems to have been covered in British newspapers of the time - Daily Telegraph 31 May 1905, though details of death and job title differ (I haven't added this reference to the article because of the differences in detail and not wanting to make a judgement about accuracy). I'm leaning Keep based on the article found by Andrew Davidson and the info at the start of that about other coverage. Tacyarg (talk) 15:15, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This article needs a serious copy-edit and overhaul. Keep !voters here might be interested in showing it some love. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 00:15, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have copyedited, thanks for the suggestion, but agree it needs a content overhaul and sourcing, which I don't feel competent to do. Tacyarg (talk) 09:10, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: it reads better now, and it is a interesting if blunt story about a cruel administrator. Notability is sufficient. -- Whiteguru (talk) 10:43, 28 September 2020 (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.