Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baltimore Choral Arts Society

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. It appears the nominator now also agrees the given sources are enough to support notability. Whether a Baltimorean with an interest in choir will expand the article or not is unfortunately beyond the remit of AfD. (non-admin closure) asilvering (talk) 03:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baltimore Choral Arts Society

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No refs on the page for many years. I see some mentions and directories and possibly even programmes for performances, but I'm not seeing the level of substantial independent reliable sourcing needed to meet the inclusion criteria on en.wiki JMWt (talk) 17:20, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Maryland. JMWt (talk) 17:20, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's plenty of WP:SIGCOV [1] - article needs work but that's not grounds for deletion. Simonm223 (talk) 17:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok great, please add the strongest sources to the page that show the notability criteria have been met. JMWt (talk) 17:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about you do it instead. Simonm223 (talk) 17:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The news sources you've provided are mostly not accessible to me in my country. But you are right that these appear to be SIGCOV looking at the titles of the news articles, but it is a shame nobody has improved it since 2009. JMWt (talk) 17:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also don't have a subscription to Baltimore newspapers. This is neither here nor there for whether the article should be deleted. Hopefully an editor from Baltimore will see this conversation and do it. Simonm223 (talk) 18:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 18:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I see enough independent reviews to support notability. Mccapra (talk) 21:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.