Deletion of Sarah's Choice

Comment: per . Besides sources already listed in the article, it is covered in mainstream news sources, such as http://www.times-herald.com/Local/Coweta-Pregnancy-looking-to-expand-its-programs-933634 this one from the ''Times-Herald'', and http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09281/1003819-60.stm this one from the ''Pittsburgh Post-Gazette''. This google news search: http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22sarah%27s+choice%22&scoring=a&hl=en&ned=us&um=1&sa=N&sugg=d&as_ldate=2000&as_hdate=2009&lnav=hist11 shows many more reliable sources behind paywalls, but there's more than enough here to establish notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: ndash; per : "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." These include the ''Pittsburgh Post-Gazette'', ''PRO Medienmagazin'' (foreign language) and ''The Pilot News'' (of Marshall County, Indiana), and several ''reliable'' Christian publications such as ''The Christian Post'' and ''Charisma (magazine)|Charisma''. An article does not need a Rotten Tomatoes review page to be notable (unless you can find a policy saying so
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NF)