Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Bauercrest

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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 12:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Camp Bauercrest[edit]

Unremarkable summer camp, no assertion of notability. Contested prod. MER-C 07:27, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 08:45, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the article is made up of the kind of material that should either be on the camp's own website, or on an internet forum set up for campers and counselors - Wikipedia is not a webstace provider or social networking site. Article does not provide any reliable sources except for its own website and the websites of two people who supposedly attended the camp. The two 'alumini' websites do not make any mention of the particular summer camp or summer camps in general, and the camp's website is a self-reference, so we have a lack of external verification for the information provided. There are thousands of camps in the United States alone, and this one does not demonstrate how this particular camp stands above and beyond all others. Delete. -- saberwyn 09:30, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

comment, do any of the camps at Category:Local council camps (Boy Scouts of America) also fail notability? Chris 11:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They probably do need to be looked at by someone with the time. In general, camps like these are not notable. They are of local importance so moving the information to another article is an option. Vegaswikian 00:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is a point I have been making at the Scouting WikiProject, there is an irascible user who insists otherwise. Chris 03:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No assertion of notability. Moving the contents to an article for the area, may also be considered an option. I suspect that the template may need to go also since it may be the cause for articles to be created that will not pass an AfD. Vegaswikian 00:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete nn, likewise about template. Chris 03:28, 1 February 2007 (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.