Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fresh Starts in Augusta, Maine

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 delete. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:24, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fresh Starts in Augusta, Maine[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This organisation does not seem to have attracted the depth of independent, reliable coverage required to be considered notable. Most of the sources in which the group is mentioned cover a different group named United Way which presented Fresh Starts with an award. The coverage is not of Fresh Starts itself, as evidenced by the source assessment table attached.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
http://getconnected.volunteermaine.org/agency/detail/?agency_id=82504	Includes sections such as "Who We Are" and "What We Do", appears affiliated.	For basic verification, yes. For claims of notability, no.	By virtue of affiliation.	✘ No
https://uwkv.org/Campaign-Awards-Recognitions	Source is by a group the article asserts to have given them an award.	Don't see why not.	The source does not mention "Fresh Starts" at all.	✘ No
https://www.centralmaine.com/2018/02/17/united-way-of-kennebec-valley-raises-record-breaking-1-66-million/	Appears unaffiliated.	Don't see why not.	Mentions Fresh Start twice, the majority of coverage is given to United Way, a group which gave Fresh Starts an award, not Fresh Starts itself.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

SITH (talk) 13:04, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. SITH (talk) 13:04, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. SITH (talk) 13:04, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sources do not indicate this is a notable local organization. Reywas92^Talk 22:44, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 02:22, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 12:27, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete an apparently worthy organization, but coverage is all local. Mangoe (talk) 15:13, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination and the nominator's decisive forensics. -The Gnome (talk) 13:34, 23 March 2019 (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.