Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Yamhill

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. — FireFox (UTC) 10:21, 28 May '06

[edit] Camp Yamhill

A nn article about a summer camp in Oregon. It appears to be almost entirely a copyvio from here, and besides that, contains no information about why this camp is notable enough to be included in an encyclopaedia. Páll ^{(Die pienk olifant)} 01:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete reads like an advertising factsheet, and is more or less a copyvio. No assertion of notability; no encyclopaedic value. NPOV almost irredeemably lacking - the whole thing would need scrapping for NPOV compliance, thus delete. --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 02:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable and no logical place to merge it. Ted 04:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete not notable Hdtopo 05:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, nn camp. --Terence Ong 10:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, nn--Jusjih 13:38, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Not notable, non-encyclopedic. Steveo2 19:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Osbus 21:36, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I know the guy who wrote this. It's not a copyright violation, since he wrote the same thing at h2g2, that's his page you linked up there (do you guys bother to read talk pages?). I agree that it needs major work. --Liface 20:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep or Move Having fairly limited experience on Wikipedia I am willing to respect the decision here, but I would like details on what each of you thought was lacking besides the generic 'reason-for-deletion' terms. First, I would like to question the primary assertion of non-notability by referring you to criteria 1 on Wikipedia:Importance and pointing out that this camp hosts thousands of different persons annually and acts as a cultural unifier for Churches of Christ in the Northwest US, which I would classify as "at least well-known in a community." Having met said criteria, "there's no reason to delete it on the basis of it being: of insufficient importance, fame or relevance or... obscure. (Detailed obscure topics hurt no-one because it's hard to find them by accident, and Wikipedia isn't paper.)" Granted, this is an article on an obscure location, globally speaking... Perhaps this article would do better on WikiTravel as per point 3 on Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. I would also request examples of NPOV violations in this article so I can do better in the future; I thought this article was very neutral, as it passed rigorous editing for NPOV over at H2G2. Isle 18:39, 25 May 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.