This article was nominated for deletion on 14 July 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
I have no objections to deleting the article. Iowamutt (talk) 00:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
John Lakian, himself, also has no objections to deleting the article. Rcnyc32 (talk) 10:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Due to his current reappearance in the limelight, http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2015/02/13/john-lakian-again-under-microscope/AfepcChiueRhPzyhGPCuWI/story.html?s_campaign=email_BG_TodaysHeadline", this article should remain. Also, the some of the exaggerations that he made about himself should be remarked upon since they were key attractions for voters, that is, h claimed to have a degree from Harvard and he never went to Harvard. He claimed he received a "battlefield promotion" which means he was promoted from an enlisted man to an officer rank in the field and there was never a battlefield promotion. He also claimed that his father died of his World War II wounds where his father actually died, tragically, in an auto/trolley collision in Worcester. Shouldn't Wikipedia be the place to call "exaggerations" lies when they actually are outright falsehoods? Yes the court found that there were inaccuracies in the Globe story, but the inaccurate statements were not the main three. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hhfjbaker (talk • contribs) 22:34, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
