Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log Cabin Wilderness Camp
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 merge to Los Angeles Area Council. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:29, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Log Cabin Wilderness Camp (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable camp without any references to establish notability or elevation. Content overlaps significantly with Los Angeles Area Council#Log Cabin Wilderness Camp. Merger discussion initiated at the start of this month (Dec 2009) has only generated two opinions up to this point, mine and one user opposing. Article should either be deleted, or redirected to relevant section on other article. Optigan13 (talk) 02:20, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. —Optigan13 (talk) 02:25, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Los Angeles Area Council — Rlevse • Talk • 02:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Depends on length of article: If it's short, we can merge it with LAAC. If it was long, and dominates the LAAC artilce (as it did at one point), it should be its own article. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 02:39, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per Rlevse Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 07:23, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge back again. Major content was a copyvio that I deleted a month ago. The LAAC article needs lots of work before any camp articles are spun off. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 11:06, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge relevant information and set this title up as a redirect; if the content becomes too unwieldy, I suppose we can discuss it at that time. Cocytus [»talk«] 22:56, 3 January 2010 (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.