Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Courage


 * 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 keep. Participants (aside from the nominator) all agree that there is sufficient coverage to meet WP:GNG. RL0919 (talk) 09:29, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Camp Courage

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No reliable secondary sources on a WP:BEFORE check. Fails WP:ORG as a result. AmericanAir88(talk) 18:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:31, 20 August 2019 (UTC)


 * This is part of a campaign covering at least 5 summer camps currently. Please see:
 * Articles for deletion/Camp Courage
 * Articles for deletion/Camp Deer Run
 * Articles for deletion/Camp Interlaken
 * Articles for deletion/Camp Tel Noar (3rd nomination)
 * Articles for deletion/Camps Kenwood and Evergreen
 * --Doncram (talk) 21:19, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

*Keep Meets WP:GNG with significant coverage, often concerning the camp's specific catering for children with special needs which appears to make it notable e.g., , .Pontificalibus 06:20, 23 August 2019 (UTC) wrong camps. --Pontificalibus 09:30, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is part of a new campaign to delete a bunch of summer camp articles.  I have seen previous campaigns, mostly ending in Keep decisions, including one about a bunch of Jewish summer camps (this is not one, but see Articles for deletion/Jewish summer camps and local organizations).  I don't get the interest in deleting these.  Are you against summer camps for children with disabilities????  It can be appropriate to tag for more sources and development, but I believe that there will exist coverage about this project, which surely was covered in newspapers when it was created because of its obvious public benefit/public interest nature.  IMHO, summer camps are like public schools and parks and other places/facilities which touch the lives of many persons, often in significant ways, and are written about somewhat at least in guidebook-type literature (which can be very reliable and high in quality), and it serves the public to have these covered in at least a reference way, and IMHO Wikipedia could probably be a comprehensive gazetteer (sp?) about them, like we are for populated places. --Doncram (talk) 21:06, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is a consensus among Wikipedians that schools, parks, camps, major houses of worship, etc. belong in Wikipedia because these are important in people's lives and many people reminisce about these places. I think Wikipedia should settle this issue once and for all. Also, as per User:Pontificalibus, meets WP:GNG with significant coverage, often concerning the camp's specific catering for children with special needs which appears to make it notable e.g., , .Knox490 (talk) 04:40, 28 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Those articles are about Camp Courages (or Camps Courage?) in other states. That said, I checked newspapers.com for articles about Camp Courage in Minnesota, and there are plenty of articles about the camp.  The two camps in Minnesota have been covered regularly by the Star Tribune and the St. Cloud Times.  So, I suggest keep. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 17:10, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Ooops, well at least some other Camp Courages might pass WP:GNG if only we had articles about them.Pontificalibus 17:23, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 19:19, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep It appears that the camp meets WP:GNG as there is significant coverage for the topic, although the article needs some work. Taewangkorea (talk) 09:03, 30 August 2019 (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.