Talk:Daniel Webster Council

Scouting Low‑importance

	Scouting portal Daniel Webster Council is part of the Scouting WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Scouting and Guiding on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to boy and girl organizations, WAGGGS and WOSM organizations as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to Scouting. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ScoutingWikipedia:WikiProject ScoutingTemplate:WikiProject ScoutingScouting articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: New Hampshire Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	New Hampshire portal This article is supported by WikiProject New Hampshire (assessed as Low-importance).

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Move[edit]

Done

Council camps are not notable outside the council. This should be renamed to the council and expanded. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 02:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not notable from a Scouting framework, but plenty notable from a New Hampshire perspective. (See the category "Summer camps in New Hampshire".) If someone has information on the total miles of hiking trails (I think somewhere around 20) that are open to the public on the reservation, that would be very useful. The reservation protects a significant chunk of the Belknap Mountain Range in central New Hampshire. --Ken Gallager (talk) 13:39, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scout camps have no legal presence separate from the council and generally no notability outside of the council area. The prime guideline here is Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Non-commercial organizations: "Individual chapters of national and international organizations are usually not notable enough to warrant a separate article unless sufficient notability is established through reliable sources that extend beyond the organization's local area." The article does not establish notability outside the council. Removing notability tags does not fix the problem.

If the camp is truly notable as part of Belknap Mountain, then content should be added to that article; currently it makes no mention of the camp.

Articles should be created with a top-down approach: National, then council, then camp, with notability considered. There is no article on the camp's owner, the Daniel Webster Council (this is currently a redirect to Scouting in New Hampshire). There is not enough content in Scouting in New Hampshire and this article to justify separate articles. See Stonewall Jackson Area Council and Tidewater Council for examples of good council articles.

Yes, a few articles on Scout camps exist, but a lot more have been merged into their council article. Camps, districts and lodges exist to serve the council. In my opinion, the only camp article that should exist separately is Tunnel Mill Scout Reservation; as part of the John Work House and Mill Site it is a Registered Historic Place, thus establishing notability.

--—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of further discussion, I have moved and expanded the article. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 16:49, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and merge proposal[edit]

The notability tag was just removed from this article with the comment plenty of other Scout camps have articles, the reason why I placed the notability tag on this article was that the article did not provide any proof of notability, the notability guideline relevant for this article would be WP:CORP it says An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources, there are no sources provided in the article and I could not find any on a quick search. Using the argument that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid means of establishing notability in my opinion. I would highly recommend that this article be merged into Daniel Webster Council or its notability established using reliable sources.--Captain-tucker (talk) 13:50, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Merge to Establish Council[edit]

I could see a temporary merge of the topic into Daniel Webster Council, as the previously proposed "top-down" architecture. In time and with enough interest, the camp could be respun off into it's own article. In the mean time it would provide a notable amount of content for the Council in a Camps section. The lack of suitable web presences and available information has been restricting in further research gathering. Skydive23 (talk) 16:26, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.