Talk:Angels at Risk

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because The Surgeon General of the Untied States in his most recent 2016 report wrote an entire chapter highlighting how prevention education is the future of reducing substance misuse and related harm significantly. According to the 2016 Facing Addiction in America: The Surgeon General’s Report on Alcohol, Drugs and Health states in Chapter 3: Prevention, “Prevention programs and interventions can have a strong impact and be cost-effective, but only if evidence-based components are used and if those components are delivered in a coordinated and consistent fashion throughout the at-risk period. Parents, schools, health care systems, faith communities, and social service organizations should be involved in delivering comprehensive, evidence-based community prevention programs that are sustained over time.” Thus showcasing that the prevention portion of getting this message out is through prevention education programs.

Prevention is the future of America’s biggest health crisis of addiction. Nobody believes in prevention because it is hard to evidence yet everybody is desperate for prevention. This is exactly what Angels at Risk has been doing since 1997 and therefore should be allowed to be reviewed for Wikipedia. Angels at Risk idea is simply to report that prevention works at many levels.

--Jar41443 (talk) 22:51, 10 February 2017 (UTC)jar41443


 * @Jar41443: Just because Angels at Risk is involved in a noble cause does not make the organization significant or important. There needs to be more of a claim about the organization; ideally, you need to show that the organization has been written about in multiple reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 00:25, 11 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, thank you so much for your note. I took what you said about more reliable sources and did some more research on Angels at Risk and have found a variety of sources which I have cited and put into the article. If I should be doing it differently or you have another suggestion on how to go about it, I am completely open to it and would appreciate the help. Thank you again. Jar41443 (talk) 00:56, 11 February 2017 (UTC)jar41443


 * @Jar41443: Sources don't have to be online to use them, but if they are online, it will speed the verification process if you provide links. —C.Fred (talk) 00:58, 11 February 2017 (UTC)