LPedia:Requests for Deletion/Order of the Arrow

Request for Deletion Discussion The following is an ongoing deletion discussion. Please feel free to voice your opinion on whether you think the page should be kept, deleted, merged, etc. You can use any of the following prior to your comments to show your opinion. {{Keep}} - use this if you think the page should be kept. {{Delete}} - use this if you think the page should be deleted. {{Move}} - use this if you think the page would be suitable in a different location or with a different name. {{Merge}} - use this if you think the page should be merged with another page. {{Redirect}} - use this if you think the page should be redirected to another page. {{Comment}} - if you would just like to make comments whether you are neutral or just prefer not to make a decision.

Order of the Arrow

This page has no relevance to the Libertarian Party or its history. The mere fact of having Libertarian/libertarians in its past membership, even notable ones, is not enough to make it relevant. CarynAnnHarlos (talk) 05:45, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

• Delete Full disclosure -- when I was working on Wikipedia long ago I was an adamant inclusionist and would still be if I hadn't walked away from it, but I'm unable to serve as this article's defense counsel.

I might be able to entertain the possibility of this organization being relevant if there could be ties to the party (or at least libertarian political thought or a relevant political yardstick for comparison), such as potentially being an incubator for libertarians. Unfortunately, this article is almost verbatim from Wikipedia and practically none of its present content can be argued as relevant for LPedia -- the closest I can see is that mention of being with the Order of the Arrow might be something to include in LPedia biographies of its historical membership. I can make no case for this article being on LPedia, at least not short of what would amount to a from-scratch rewrite anyway. What relevance might this organization have? I have no idea. I'm not familiar with this subject, and the article itself can't make the argument on its own.

Also, if deleted, practically no original content will be lost as it's all still on Wikipedia and it seems to be as secure in its continued existence there as anything ever is, so I can't even defend it on the grounds of finding it a new home before removing it from here.

Our standards for inclusion are pretty low, but there is one essential: There needs to be some relevance towards the Libertarian Party -- however tenuous -- and this is a minimum of one complete remove from this, at least in its present form. -- Strangelv (talk) 10:46, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

• Delete per nominator. The article is irrelevant to the Libertarian Party. AMK152 (talk) 14:12, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

• DeleteThe mention of membership is perfectly relevant under the pages of any Libertarians - but not as a stand-along article. Otherwise my Church could be a stand-alone article, it has a state chair and LNC member attending (well we are pretty bad at attendance right now, but I think you know what I mean - our membership or attendance doesn't make an organization notable for LPedia.CarynAnnHarlos (talk) 03:51, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

• Delete I agree the article is irrelevant to the Libertarian Party. Starchild (talk) 05:30, 26 May 2017 (UTC)