Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Fire Club

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. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 17:57, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Camp Fire Club

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

nn unsourced, classic case of WP:NOT a directory Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 16:18, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- NN is wrong and "unsourced" is not a deletion criterion, nor is WP:NOT. So a procedural close would be appropriate, but as it happens, this subject easily meets the GNG. Just consider:
- Two Westchester groups are helping to save the American chestnut tree
- Field & Stream. June 2004. pp. 9–. ISSN 87558599 Parameter error in {{issn}}: Invalid ISSN..
- Charles Hallock; William A. Bruette (1915). Forest and Stream. Forest and Stream Publishing Company. pp. 398–.
- Amateur Sportsman. Outdoor World Publishing Company. 1909. pp. 3–.
- And so on... Thus keep. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 19:42, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article reflects nothing of that, nor have you added these sources.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:16, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What does it matter what the article reflects? What does it matter what I added? It's almost as if you haven't read WP:ARTN. It's almost as if you didn't bother to do WP:BEFORE. You ought to withdraw this nomination. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 14:34, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's almost as if you haven't read WP:SOFIXIT.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 18:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's almost as if *you* haven't read SOFIXIT. You're the one complaining about the state of the article, not me. You're the one, if anyone, who that editing guideline refers to. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 15:12, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ some refs mentioning the club have been noted above but they aren't saying why the club is notable. It does appear to be a historic club and old clubs tend to have some reason they haven't disappeared, but I've looked on google and can't find anything. Willing to reconsider if more refs are forthcoming. Szzuk (talk) 13:45, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This was a good nomination but i'm switching to keep based upon the refs below. Szzuk (talk) 08:24, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Meets WP:GNG. Some source examples include: [1], [2], [3] [4]; more are also available. These sources also provide background information describing how the organization is noteworthy. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:58, 19 November 2018 (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.