User talk:Toddkelly9

Mt. Gilead Camp
copied from Talk:Mt. Gilead Camp

This page should not be speedily deleted because... this is a viable non-profit 501c3 which serves both as summer camp and foundation offering scholarships to those in need of financial assistance in addition to programming that serves hundreds of inner-city students a year. This is a not a promotional page, but a historical account of how this non-profit came into existence. If this article is due for deletion, then so should be the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Greystone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Merrimac https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Quest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charity:_Water --Toddkelly9 (talk) 20:10, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Normally a discussion should continue on the same page. In this case, as the page is likely to be has been deleted, I'm following up on your arguments here...


 * Firstly the discussion is about the article, not about the camp. No matter how worthy the camp may be, the article falls short of the required encyclopedic standards. The welcome message on your previous talk page contains plenty of help as to what is required of an article.


 * Of the four examples you choose to compare to:
 * Camp Quest and Charity: Water are decent articles. They have references from independent news sources. They're not promotional.
 * Camp Greystone is a bit lightweight. Most of the references are self-generated. You could take it to articles for deletion if you felt strongly about it.
 * Camp Merrimac, like Mt. Gilead Camp, has only self-generated references, and consequently comes across as promotional. You're just as entitled (or looking at it another way, just as obliged) as any other editor to tag it for a speedy deletion with if you think it's not notable,  if you think it's promotional, or  for both.
 * Regards, Bazj (talk) 21:34, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I've just seen that the article was also deleted as a copyright violation of www.mtgileadcamp.org/about-us/our-history/. Please take the time to read Wikipedia's copyright policy. Bazj (talk) 21:49, 16 February 2015 (UTC)