Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Florence House

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. -- Cirt (talk) 10:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Florence House[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Homeless shelter in Portland, Maine. Although its opening attracted some local media coverage, there's no indication that this satisfies WP:N. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:55, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:10, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

More than just press during the opening, it had 5 years of press and continues to get press. This building is significant to the Governor of Maine. This is significant to HUD. This is significant to Portland, Maine. This is significant to the 40 formerly homeless people who now live permanently in this home. Key word permanently. It is more significant than the one day of press that the Jetblue flight attendant received for quitting which is somehow here on wiki...significant?. It would be good to have someone who writes about buildings or projects review this to determine significance and to help make it better. It is something worthy of documentation. There's actually a documentary but since it's media, cannot be included. Feetplanted (talk) 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Keep Clearly sufficient information from good third party sources. DGG ( talk ) 03:48, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per DGG, there are more that enough references. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 22:38, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete Two WP:Reliable Source references are provided at the article - the Portland Press-Herald and NPR Maine. In addition, Google News archive finds a dozen more articles [1], all from the Portland Press-Herald. But nothing suggests that this small homeless shelter has any significance outside the city of Portland, or that its grandiose claim "The building was created to end homelessness" (50 beds?) is anything but hype. To me this is non-notable, being of purely local significance. --MelanieN (talk) 13:51, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Please Thank you all for your comments. Though I understand user:MelanieN point that helping only 50 women doesn't sound like a lot, the building will serve to help them get to a point of living on their own, and then will allow the next 50 and the next 50 and the next 50 in the same way. Feetplanted (talk) 15:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for {{rescue}} by the Article Rescue Squadron. SnottyWong ^yak 15:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Sources in the article appear to pass WP:GNG. SnottyWong ^yak 15:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Florence House seems to be a good initiative (from what I have been able to find on Internet). But there are some issues I would like to address. There are some goings on that I find disturbing. First of all, I looked at the article and the discussion page (this is where I usually start before forming an opinion). I find it odd that an article is up for deletion so soon after it is written. I would agree that the article is badly written but that does not detract from the content. I also find it strange that a keep remark was made on the discussion page, but that it was removed. The fact that these remarks were not signed is also weird. It seems that the article has been contributed mainly by two persons (or one person working fom different locations). Also it seems that one of the contributors is canvassing for support of the article. Wikipedia is not meant for political activities, it should remain neutral and factual. Another of the reasons I feel it is necessary to voice my opinion is that we again have a discussion with abbreviations that will not be familiar to those not living in the United States, this the English Wikipedia, also meaning Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK (not forgetting all the other places where people speak or read English) and not the American Wikipedia. HUD for example is not a term I am familiar with, but I presume it means the Department of Housing and Urban Developement. The goings on in the United States should be explained to make sense of most of this. Homelessness is not just a problem in the United States but everywhere. It is a sign of social responsibilty and solidarity that initiatives are being taken to combat this undesirable phenomenon. The fact that there is a retreat in the UK named Florence House makes everything mistier. If this initiative is the social initiative I believe it to be, the article should be kept but rewritten. If on the other hand, this is a political statement (and I am not in a position to judge this), it should go. --JHvW (talk) 01:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.