User talk:Nswedlund

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Alfadog (talk) 20:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Speedy deletion of Camp Nathanael
A tag has been placed on Camp Nathanael requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ten Pound Hammer • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 16:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of your paragraph, your article is going to be deleted because it doesn't offer any relevant argument to retain it in the face of its status as violating copyright law. Wikipedia takes copyright law seriously and cannot keep articles that violate copyright. If you believe there needs to be an article about this camp -- which is not automatically going to remain unchallenged -- you need to write it yourself and not copy its text from another source. That's the bare minimum. Articles in Wikipedia must also be about notable topics, and they must be verifiable. Please read up on these elements before trying to re-create your article. If there's something further I can do to help, you can leave a note on my talk page. Accounting4Taste: talk 16:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

As Accounting4Taste said, Wikipedia does not permit copy-and-paste edits from other websites. Articles must be on subjects that are notable and verifiable.  Acroterion  (talk)  16:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

November 2007
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you create an inappropriate page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.  Acroterion  (talk)  16:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I should further point out that the article fits speedy deletion criteria for copyright violation, notability and advertisement; all three issues must be addressed, not just copyright.  Acroterion  (talk)  16:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Please provide sources that indicate the notability of this organization (i.e., its suitability for inclusion in an encyclopedia). You appear to have addressed the main issues of copyright (I didn't go line-by-line to check), but WP:NOTABILITY must be addressed, or the article will be deleted as a non-notable organization.  Thanks for working with us, although we still have some distance to go.  Regards,    Acroterion  (talk)  16:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The organization's website doesn't count. Reliable sources requires multiple, independent references in publications of note.  Self-referential references aren't references at all (as this circular sentence indicates!).    Acroterion  (talk)  17:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Notability
Hi. You must establish notability - why would your camp be in an encyclopedia. Is it well-known for some reason and has that been written up in newspapers or other non-affiliated sources? Wikipedia is not a business directory and the mere fact of its existence does not qualify it for entry. Thanks. --Alfadog (talk) 20:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts. However, I do have a few questions and thoughts concerning this issue.

Wikipedia's current definition of "notability" is extremely subjective as described by Wikipedia.com itself i.e. "it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception." On that note:

Where do the Wikipedia Notability Guidelines fall on pages like garden hose for example? How is "garden hose" (Not even any specific garden hose of some historic or cultural significance but simply "garden hoses" in general) considered "worthy of note"? It would appear that the mere fact that they exist DOES qualify it/them for entry. I should mention that I do not mean in any manner to appear condescending in tone; it is only that, in terms of Wikipedia's Notability Guidelines, there appears to be serious issue of subjectivity.

Camp Nathanael] was established in 1962 in partnership with an organization (Christian Service Brigade]) that dates back as early as 1937. It would seem that an online encyclopedia that deems garden hose as "worthy of note" yet questions the "notability" of two organizations that date back both 45 and 70 years perhaps has some misplaced priorities and sense of what makes something truly "worthy of note".

I would hope that the admins of Wikipedia would see that the page in question is by no means an attempt at veiled advertisement. Furthermore, I've looked deeper into the subject and found two articles published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune where Camp Nathanael is not only mentioned, but indeed plays a featured role, therefore establishing "noteworthy" status. The articles are:

HAPPY CAMPERS; A guide to summer programs, camps and adventures. Date: March 21, 1998 Author: Harlow, Tim http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-62576368.html

ANNUAL SUMMER CAMP GUIDE; Listing of summer camps for children and youths. Date: March 3, 2001 http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-71197462.html

Also Camp Nathanael was at the center of a criminal case in 1997, May 13, 1997 State of Minnesota Respondent vs. Bruce Mial Mason Appellant. C9-96-1534. http://www.loislaw.com/ogpc/login.htp?WSRet=1&dockey=15191412@MNCASE&OLDURL=/gpc/index.htp&OLDREFURL=http%3A//news.google.com/archivesearch%3Fq%3DBruce%2BMial%2BMason%26hl%3Den%26um%3D1%26ie%3DUTF-8%26tab%3Dwn

Thank you for your time. -nswedlund
 * Well, IMO, an encyclopedia of general knowledge would certainly have an article on garden hose but not necessarily on your camp. Wikipedia is not a business directory and is making no effort to catalog the millions of businesses extant, not matter their age or degree of establishment. What would make your camp an existing, not presumed or presupposed, subject of general interest. We have an article on summer camps, we no more need an article on individual camps than we need an article on individual hardware stores that sell garden hoses. However, it is not my decision to make nor yours, read up on the deletion policies and let the community here decide. Best. --Alfadog (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Camp Nathanael
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Camp Nathanael, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add db-author to the top of Camp Nathanael. AWeenieMan (talk) 23:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. VivioFa teFan  (Talk, Sandbox) 23:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)