Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Huckleberry 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. (non-admin closure) (t &#183; c)  buidhe  08:24, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Huckleberry House

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:NORG/WP:NONPROFIT. Graywalls (talk) 22:06, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 22:06, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 22:06, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.      </ol>

<ol> <li> The book notes on page 95: "Huckleberry House was an alternative shelter arrangement—not a crash pad exactly, but not an agency that fit comfortably within the preexisting framework of California's child welfare and juvenile justice services. It was a new, alternative model that rested on a commitment to autonomy and respected youths' ability to make their own decisions. The runaway shelter operated outside law enforcement, juvenile justice, and child welfare systems, and staff involved parents only with the explicit permission of the youth themselves." The book notes on page 97: "Huckleberry House is generally credited with being the first runaway shelter among a small group of sibling agencies having roots in geographic areas where adolescents congregated in the late 1960s and early 1970s." The book notes on page 101: "On June 1, 1967, Beggs was named codirector of the project, and just three weeks later, on June 23, 1967, Huckleberry House hastily opened its doors in all its experimental glory. Although Huckleberry House ostensibly was developed at a time of crisis to meet the short-term needs of the community in 1967, staffers discovered quickly that the need for services persisted." The book notes on page 109: "In spite of Huckleberry House's apparent roots in the Digger model, some blue-blooded counter-culturalists, such as Emmett Grogan, dismissed it as a place for 'some runaway kids' who 'became disillusioned with the Haight-Ashbury' to get 'room and board for a couple of days, until their family made the necessary arrangements for their return home.' It was, in his view, a place for less-than-serious counter-culturists. To some extent, Grogan's assessment was correct." The book notes on page 111: "Digger Emmett Grogan complained that 'Huckleberry House ... was as lame as its name' and characterized it as a 'nice, mild, safe, responsible way for the church to become involved in 'hippiedom.''" The book notes on on pages 111–112: "Beggs recalled discussing bail money at the first very organizational meeting of Huckleberry House. The planners were anxious about their legal vulnerability, and they were right to worry. On October 19, 1967, several months after opening its doors, the police raided Huckleberry House, arresting all the youth (for being without parental supervision) and their adult caretakers (for contributing to the delinquency of minors). At issue was Hucklevberry House's failure to obtain parental consent for sheltering a 15-year-old boy. [two more paragraphs about Huckleberry House]"</li> <li> The book notes: "But Huckleberry House was something new. It was founded on the idea that runaways were family problems, not police problems. And if the kids refused to let Huckleberry House contact their parents, the shelter would not hand them over to the cops. They had the right to keep running. Grogan might sneer at Huckleberry's fresh-scrubbed piety, but in the end, Beggs and company had more guts and staying power than the Diggers. At the very first Huckleberry House meeting, Beggs and his staff discussed how to raise bail money in case they were dragged off to jail. They were right to be concerned. The police were constantly hovering around the Huckleberry House shelter, which was housed in a two-story brown Victorian at One Broderick Street, a few blocks from the tumult of Haight-Ashbury." The book notes: "The desperation of America's families was fully displayed on the Huckleberry House bulletin board, which was papered with pleading letters and photos of missing teens. 'Dad promises to ease up. You can trust Aunt Lou,' read one. 'Until there is some contact with my daughter, my life will be miserable,' read another. Some seemed certain to drive the runaways even deeper into their new world: 'Rich Hoyfeld—you have received your draft notice. You've been reclassified 1-A. Contact your mother." The book notes: "The chief antagonist of Huckleberry House was Juvenile Court Judge Raymond J. O'Connor, who ran San Francisco's youth justice system with an iron and hand and saw the upstart shelter as a challenge to his authority. ... The police raid took place on the night of October 19, 1967, several months after Huckleberry House opened its doors. An inexperienced night manager gave the cops their opening when she failed to make the obligatory phone call to the parents of a fifteen-year-old runaway, to get permission to shelter their son for the night. Suddenly there was a crying mother on the Huckleberry House doorsteps and a swarm of cops. The SFPD arrested everyone on the premises, including the runaways, for being without parental supervision; and the adult caretakers, for contributing to the delinquency of minors. ... The raid on Huckleberry House was traumatic for its young staff. But it had a galvanizing effect on the community surrounding the shelter."</li> <li> The article notes: "Since 1967 and the blossoming of San Francisco's flower children, Huckleberry House and its occupants have learned a lot about limits and lists, young people on the loose and their parents, talk and temper. ... Since its founding Huckleberry House has changed as the demands of young people have changed, as the street scene in San Francisco itself has changed. More of the urban poor come to Huckleberry House now. In the early days, the clientele was overwhelmingly white, from suburban or rural communities. But with a network of runaway facilities across the country, many of those youngsters find a haven closer to home. ... There is, however, no shortage of youngsters to fill Huck's six beds. This year, it is projected that about half the 400 or so youngsters who will be served by Huckleberry House will come from the Bay Area. About 25 percent will be black, 25 peercent Hispanic and Asian, 2½ percent other minorities, the rest white."</li> <li> The book notes: "My research for this book took me from New York's Covenant House to San Francisco's Huckleberry House to Washington, D.C.'s Runaway House and, finally, to the Teaneck Home for Girls in Teaneck, New Jersey. ... Huckleberry House's origins can be traced back to 1967."</li> <li> The article notes: "Huckleberry House places no blame on child or parents, but stays on neutral ground. A youth must have the legal consent of the parents before he can stay over night. About one-third of the youngsters come from the Bay Area, one-third from other parts of California, and the others from 34 states and Canada. ... To promote understanding between the youths and their parents is the purpose of Huckleberry House, which is supported by the Northern California Conference of the United Church of Christ, Glide Foundation of the Methodist Church and the San Francisco Council of Churches. One purpose of family sessions is to allow more freedom and demand the responsibility that goes with it. When rules are laid down, explain why, not 'just because I said so.'"</li> </ol>

There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Huckleberry House to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 04:51, 28 June 2020 (UTC)</li></ul>


 * Hello, What is "sufficient" and "significant" and have you personally inspected the contents beyond checking for keyword match? I wonder, specifically, because while you provide titles and ISBNs, but don't include the range of page #s. Graywalls (talk) 06:55, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Notability says: "'Significant coverage' addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." I have personally inspected every source I have listed here. I included quotes in the collapse box titled "Sources with quotes". For the books from Google Books and Internet Archive sources, I manually typed the text included the quotes of what I think helps establish notability so this is "beyond checking for keyword match". I included page numbers for Runaways: How the Sixties Counterculture Shaped Today's Practices and Policies in the collapse box. Cunard (talk) 08:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:03, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep Article needs further improvements but satisfies general criteria. Ashishkafle (talk) 07:47, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.