Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Horseshoe


 * 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. (aeropa gitica) 09:25, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Camp Horseshoe
Prod removed without comment. Simply not notable. Delete. BlueValour 00:29, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * This is a very informative page, as well as a very accurate page. As a horseshoe alumni, I am proud that someone has dedicated a wikipedia page to camp horseshoe. I am confident that in the future, many visitors will find this page informative and excellent. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Arubin19 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 28 August 2006.
 * Note that this and an edit to the aforementioned article are Arubin19's only edits. &mdash;  Da rk Sh ik ar i   talk /contribs  01:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - A google search gets some hopeful hits, and as there's no notability criteria for camps, I guess there's no concrete reason to delete this. Could use a lot of cleanup though. --Daniel Olsen 01:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * While there may not be a camp-specific notability guideline, the general notion of notability is clearly that reliable sources have decided the camp is note-worthy in some way and covered it. There is no doubt this camp exists; the question is, why should it appear in an encyclopedia? Gwernol 01:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete one of thousands of summer camps in the US alone. In no way notable. Gwernol 01:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep yeah coverage by reliable sources is the way to go here. Camp has 70+ years of history and is apparently well known and has a lot of alums, the work they do there has been the subject of a multiple published studies . &, which is honestly more than you'd expect from the average summer camp. I can't run a news search from where I am right now, but if it gets 6 results on Google Scholar, I'm pretty sure there's some general news articles on it with meaningful information. No real reason to delete if there's a bunch of reliable information on it... the need for cleanup isn't a reason to delete, and as has been said, there's not a guideline for camp notability that I'm aware of. --W.marsh 01:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Please note: Both of those studies refer to a different Camp Horseshow, one in West Virginia that was also the subject of most of my Nexis hits. You, and TruthbringerToronto, below, may want to change your votes. Uucp 10:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've crossed out my vote for now. --W.marsh 13:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete unless better evidence of notability is provided. Nexis has 42 hits for "Camp Horseshoe" but only one is this camp horseshoe, and that hit is just a summer camp guide from 2005. Uucp 02:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Very Weak Keep The most important question one must ask here is whether the information on the article is verified. WP:V is a policy while there is no official policy on notability. The article in question is covered by reliable sources (which is a guideline) which in my humble opinion, is a stronger guideline than WP:N (which is not even a guideline to begin with). However, this statement must also be taken into strong consideration here. -- S iva1979 Talk to me  02:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I fail to see we need to reinvent the wheel of policy or guidelines every time it's inconvenient. There is WP:CORP in this case, specifically the guidelines for notability of companies.  Change them if you must, but in the meantime it's the same level playing-field for all.  Tychocat 06:30, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, per the points made by W.marsh. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral, in light of comments by Uucp. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 14:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete article reads like an ad, and it doesn't seem to be notable per se. Sounds like it happened to be the site of a minor study or two - whose results don't seem especially notable, so I don't see why the site would be. Opabinia regalis 05:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, I like it, and to me it's not in your face advertising. -- Armadillo From Hell 06:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Advertisement.  The fact the article is alleged to be informative or that you may "like" it, is not a factor in notability.  Fails WP:CORP for lacking non-trivial multiple third-party articles, no national awards, no distinguished programming.  In fact, the article fails to develop or even imply any notability whatsoever.  I was initially encouraged by the 17900 Ghits, but this reduces to 345 distinct hits, and most of these aren't relevant since there's many a "Camp Horseshoe" around the nation.  Tychocat 06:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Very weak keep per W.marsh. --Core des at talk. ^_^ 07:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. While the studies cited by W. Marsh would get a weak keep from me too, they both refer to Ohio and West Virginia, and *this* Camp Horseshoe is in Wisconsin. So delete unless some other reliable sources come to light.  &mdash;Cel  ithemis  07:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, while "Camp Horsehoe" is a common camp name, notability for THIS camp horseshoe hasn't been established. No special media mention, historical value, or other claim to notability. --Shirahadasha 08:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree, it's simply non-notable. &mdash; Khoikhoi 08:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Shirahadasha and Tychocat. --Core des at talk. ^_^ 08:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. Camp is generally not notable, unless you get sexually molested at one.-Kmaguir1 08:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete unless some proof of significance can be given as to why this camp needs to be specifically name checked, rather than being covered by the concept at Summer camp. Nuttah68 11:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Very weak Delete As non notable. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 11:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete. Notability in the broad sense seems missing though I am sure it is notable to those involved. --Nigel  (Talk) 14:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. No encyclopedic value asserted in the contents of the article. As an aside, I see no reason why this article should be kept when many other camp articles of equal or greater merit and compliance with wiki-policies have also been deleted. Agent 86 17:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't know what other camp articles have been deleted, but if high schools have articles why not summer camps? BTW the sourcing issues do not seem that serious. Allon FambrizziAllon Fambrizzi
 * Comment - High schools are important institutions in a community; camps are not. BlueValour 17:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Some summer camps are very important institutions in their community. Allon FambrizziAllon Fambrizzi


 * Delete nn. Ah how quickly we forget!  There is hardly widespread consensus that High Schools are notable, WP:SCHOOLS aside.  We have high school articles in abundance because there was typically no consensus to delete them, which defaults to keep.  Eusebeus 18:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom as non-notable. Big  top  23:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable. If we include all summer camps, why not day care centers? Seaphoto 01:33, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure of the connection between summer camps and day care centers. You could make the same argument against high schools. Allon FambrizziAllon Fambrizzi


 * Delete Summer-camps are businesses. There is no evidence or even assertion of meeting the standards at WP:CORP.  GRBerry 13:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * That isn't true at all. Most summer camps are run by religious/charitable organizations. Allon FambrizziAllon Fambrizzi


 * Delete I see no indication to keep despite Googlehits. The article is a little spammy, with no assertion of notability. I can't imagine anyone looking this up for encyclopedic purposes. :) Dlohcierekim 17:35, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I can. Allon FambrizziAllon Fambrizzi


 * Cleanup or Delete I'm flexible on establishments like this, but this article is simply VAIN with sentences like this: has some of the newest and finest facilities in the nation--Shuki 19:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Summer camps generally lack notability.  If this one is deleted as I suspect, we need to review Category:Summer camps.  If I recall most entries in Category:Jewish summer camps were nominated for deletion but kept as an attack on the religion. Vegaswikian 05:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * This is just an assertion. Allon FambrizziAllon Fambrizzi


 * I would remind everyone that we currently have tons of articles on summer camps despite all of these arguments; see Hampshire College Summer Studies in Mathematics among others. Why not delete that article as well? Allon FambrizziAllon Fambrizzi
 * A camp is an important institution just as is a school or company. Just because a camp or a company is a business does not mean that it does not contain valid and notable information. Clearly many other camps and companies are listed and do contain valuable information. Jkeesh 31 August 2006
 * 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.