Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Dawson (New Jersey)
While there doesn't appear to be enough sourcing here to merit a standalone article, but there is material and sourcing that could be and should be merged to the article for the parent municipality. It's not clear why this was not considered based on  and . As specified in the AfD heading, '''"When discussing an article, remember to consider alternatives to deletion. If you think the article could be a disambiguation page, redirected or merged to another article, then consider recommending "Disambiguation", "Redirect" or "Merge" instead of deletion. Similarly, if another editor has proposed an alternative to deletion but you think the article should be deleted instead, please elaborate why."'''{{pb}}I look forward to support for a merge and / or explanations for why a merge should not be considered
— User:Alansohn, 05:07, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Stance: merge
Cited policy: WP:BEFORE||WP:PRESERVE (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion)