Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sawmill Camp

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 of the debate was delete. -R. fiend 14:28, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sawmill_Camp

Vanity page. Speedy. Gary 02:36, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete advertisement Dlyons493 Talk 07:29, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete advertisement. --Qirex 08:01, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete ad, no real info.--Woggly 08:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Ad. utcursch | talk 11:25, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as advertising.--Alhutch 15:31, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as advertising.-- Qaz ^(talk) 05:08, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I went to Philmont so I may be biased but these should be kept. Here's why: more than 700,000 Scouts and leaders have backpacked through Philmont since 1938. These camps are familar to many people. With some additional work, the articles could be useful. I tried merging them into a Camps of Philmont article but if quality information is added to each subheading, that article will be enormous. The information could be valuable but the only way to share it is to keep all the individual articles.--L1AM 10:31, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
• Comment- As far as being advertising, its not really. Please take a look at these related AFDs. All these AFDs should be merged.--L1AM 10:33, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
  • The notability of the camp is not clear from reading the article alone. In fact, it is not clear what this camp is, who it belongs to ("Philmont" is not linked or mentioned in the article"), where it is (it is traditional to name a state and country, not latitude and longitude!)Instead we have such ad-copy as: "a great place to get a hot shower and a great program", "magnificent views", "a small but friendly staff", "a great advisor's coffee in the evenings". This is non-informative and non encyclopedic. If you think the article is worth keeping, you should take the time to write a clear lead, and cleanup, because no one who has NOT gone to this camp will be able to do so. --Woggly 07:49, 14 October 2005 (UTC) If and only if rewritten, I'd support a merge to Philmont Scout Ranch --Woggly 07:53, 14 October 2005 (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.