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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 10:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Camp Wekeela (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) • Afd statistics
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable summer camp. Of the references provided, only one (the BusinessWeek article) mentions this camp at all, and that only in passing as an example of the point being made, not as the main thrust of the article. Spammy text could be addressed, but lack of notability cannot. All ghits are promotional in nature. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:08, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do you suggest I do to improve the article? It is for a class project. The other references are from newspapers how are they not valid references? (Axs912 (talk) 14:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

In addition, there are other articles about summer camps that don't even have references. I have references. I am committed to making this right and appreciate any help (Axs912 (talk) 14:31, 25 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Comment You raise several points; I'll address them one at a time.
  1. The other references are from newspapers. How are they not valid references? The other references do not mention Camp Wekeela at all. They are about summer camps in general, but not about Camp Wekeela.
  2. In addition, there are other articles about summer camps that don't even have references. Please refer to WP:Other stuff exists -- the presence of other bad articles on Wikipedia is never an excuse to add another.
  3. It is for a class project. I recommend that you and your teacher review the guidelines at WP:School and university projects. While Wikipedia can be a great teaching tool, the content still has to meet Wikipedia guidelines.
  4. What do you suggest I do to improve the article? Find reliable sources that actually discuss this camp, with significant coverage. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What link are you referring to John?Axs912 — continues after insertion below

The word "sources", which is the Google Books link. Lots of WP links are inline. JJB 18:34, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Dan - if you take a closer look at the college weekend college days article Wekeela is mentioned.

I really appreciate your critique and advice. (Axs912 (talk) 15:42, 25 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

And what about the businessman of the year award? That doesn't talk about the Camp? Northjersey.com is not a reliable source? (Axs912 (talk) 15:53, 25 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Strong Keep I did not mean award pardon my mistake. The article clearly talks about the camp. It talks about the owner of the camp. This article is significant coverage. It uses Camp Wekeela as an example of camps being out there and people living their lives by running a camp. Its educational. The world is in need of jobs, this article exemplifies how this man uses a camp, Camp Wekeela to provide for his family and community and several families in the world. (Axs912 (talk) 16:15, 25 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Thinking on and looking at the history of the article, hasn't this already been deleted once at least? I'm sure I've read this article before but it was only posted today. Peridon (talk) 19:02, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why the negativity? This article has never been posted before. How about some advice on how to improve it and make it better? (Axs912 (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Comment If I had thought the article could be improved, I would not have nominated it for deletion. The problem is not that I think the article is bad, but that the subject does not merit inclusion in the first place. This AFD process is not a critique of the quality of the article; rather it is a discussion of the notability of the subject. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:36, 25 October 2010 (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.