Talk:Port of St. Helens

Oregon Low‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Hangon rationale[edit]

This article should not be deleted. It is a stub. The content is verifiable and states facts. It is not advertising. The Port itself is a governmental district, like a school district. The article is for public education. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Portsh (talk • contribs) 09:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How does this subject sufficiently pass WP:N? --13² 18:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article only needs to assert importance to avoid speedy deletion. A governmental district is a good faith assertion of importance. If not notable, prod or AfD are the way to go.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:51, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt this article would be deleted in AfD in a million years. The subject is going to have a ton of media coverage just because of what it is (and it does, as a quick Gnews search will verify). Arguing whether it's notable is almost like arguing whether the Sun is notable. I agree that I'm not happy about the way it was created (clearly a COI violation) but now that it's here, it's unlikely to go away. In time I'm sure some uninvolved, neutral editors will expand it properly and it will be a good addition to the project. -- Atama ^chat 01:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, I wasn't even the one who speedied it. I just noticed the user's message and decided to respond. I have no feelings either way on this article and wouldn't AFD it or vote on an AFD for it. --13² 15:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]