Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project

:{{la|San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/San_Francisco_Pretrial_Diversion_Project Stats])

:({{Find sources|San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project}})

Appears not notable. Only very small mentions when Googling (or should I say DuckDuckGoing) in webpages. Yeknom Dnalsli (talk) 17:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I created the page and could you please help me to make it more notable. Any advice? Thank you Danarabagas (talk) 17:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

:There is not really a way of making it more notable, other than making the subject more notable. Yeknom Dnalsli (talk) 17:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:42, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:42, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:42, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

• Delete Fails WP:ORG. All references are to the group's own website. Undoubtedly a worthy cause, but in order to have an article in Wikipedia, an organization must have received significant coverage from multiple external reliable sources. On a [http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=%22San+Francisco+Pretrial+Diversion+Project%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#q=%22San+Francisco+Pretrial+Diversion+Project%22&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&tbm=nws&prmd=imvns&source=lnt&tbs=ar:1&sa=X&ei=9FJKUMjLFov7qAGJloH4Bw&ved=0CB8QpwUoBQ&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=244ed54f6198aca6&biw=1079&bih=611 Google News search] I found only two outside references to this group, one a passing mention. The [http://www.sfweekly.com/2003-12-10/news/parking-break/ article in SFWeekly] even describes this group as "San Francisco's best-kept secret" which seems like another way of saying that the organization is not notable, i.e., not well known. --MelanieN (talk) 20:10, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

::A thought: might it be appropriate to add a sentence or two to San Francisco County Superior Court, which is credited with having helped to establish the program? --MelanieN (talk) 20:12, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

:::I just did that. This article could be redirected to the court article in lieu of deletion. --MelanieN (talk) 20:24, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

• Delete and create a redirect to San Francisco County Superior Court since there are some mentions of the Project in reliable sources (e.g., San Francisco Examiner, San Francisco Chronicle, SF Weekly), but not enough for a stand alone article per WP:GNG. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

: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.