- 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:07, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Foundation for MetroWest ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:ORG. Coverage is mainly local and not wider as per WP:AUD. Only one article links to this. LibStar ( talk) 01:05, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Massachusetts. LibStar ( talk) 01:05, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- If coverage is "mainly" local, then it is "at least one non-local", which is all that AUD requires. This appears to be a community foundation, and my inclination is to merge it into MetroWest (=the geographical area it serves). We probably could find sources to demonstrate separate notability, especially since one of the already-cited sources is about "National Recognition For Rigorous Philanthropic Standards", but I think that merging it up will help people understand its purpose. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 04:43, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 01:37, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. This Boston Globe article was the best thing I could find. It's less about the organization and more based on the subject of the organization's report. I think if there was more of this type of coverage, you could make an argument for the article, but all the other news coverage is routine press releases about board members and local newspapers. I am not in favor of merging as it is not clear how much information there is to enhance the target article. Would it just be one sentence about the existence of one particular charitable organization? Malinaccier ( talk) 02:03, 19 June 2024 (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.
- 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:07, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Foundation for MetroWest ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:ORG. Coverage is mainly local and not wider as per WP:AUD. Only one article links to this. LibStar ( talk) 01:05, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Massachusetts. LibStar ( talk) 01:05, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- If coverage is "mainly" local, then it is "at least one non-local", which is all that AUD requires. This appears to be a community foundation, and my inclination is to merge it into MetroWest (=the geographical area it serves). We probably could find sources to demonstrate separate notability, especially since one of the already-cited sources is about "National Recognition For Rigorous Philanthropic Standards", but I think that merging it up will help people understand its purpose. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 04:43, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 01:37, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. This Boston Globe article was the best thing I could find. It's less about the organization and more based on the subject of the organization's report. I think if there was more of this type of coverage, you could make an argument for the article, but all the other news coverage is routine press releases about board members and local newspapers. I am not in favor of merging as it is not clear how much information there is to enhance the target article. Would it just be one sentence about the existence of one particular charitable organization? Malinaccier ( talk) 02:03, 19 June 2024 (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.