Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of BSA local Order of the Arrow (OA) lodges: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 06:34, 26 January 2006

List of BSA local Order of the Arrow (OA) lodges

Seems to be a list of nn locations Wiki is not. Makemi 05:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know how to add all the subpages the same user added, so that each doesn't have to be "voted" on separately? Makemi 05:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, there are like a million and one of these, and some of them are pretty old. I've added a bunch, but there are a bunch more. I'm not sure why these have stayed this long. The organisation may be notable, but certainly listing every single lodge in the country isn't appropriate. Here's what else I've nominated under this so far. Makemi 05:48, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Ruby 05:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as we are merging and codifying these as part of ScoutingWikiProject. Chris 05:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- How is the end result supposed to look like? I am happy to change my vote if you can show me that this will produce something that will be okay with WP:NOT a directory. Kusma (討論) 06:04, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all these pages. One external link on Order of the Arrow to [1] is sufficient and should be more useful than this massive collection of non-articles. Kusma (討論) 05:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all the list pages - as it currently stands, these lists will never be able to be anything other than directories. If individual lodges are notable enough, they might be worth mentioning as part of their council's articles (assuming the council is notable enough on its own). Possibly creating Area/Section articles may be more appropriate for such grouping attempts, as more can be said about larger groups. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 06:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Compare this to the jillions of cricket articles that eventually get incorporated into something more realistic. - Jaysus Chris 06:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Please elaborate. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 06:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 *'''Delete''' all the list pages - as it currently stands, these lists will never be able to be anything other than directories.  If individual lodges are notable enough, they might be worth mentioning as part of their council's articles (assuming the council is notable enough on its own).  Possibly creating Area/Section articles may be more appropriate for such grouping attempts, as more can be said about larger groups. -- [[User:Thesquire|Thesquire]] <small>([[User_talk:Thesquire|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Thesquire|contribs]])</small> 06:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 *'''Keep'''.  Compare this to the jillions of cricket articles that eventually get incorporated into something more realistic. - [[User:Jaysuschris|Jaysus Chris]] 06:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
+**Please elaborate.  -- [[User:Thesquire|Thesquire]] <small>([[User_talk:Thesquire|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Thesquire|contribs]])</small> 06:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)