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.

Society for Electro-Acoustic Music in the United States[edit]

The result was keep.

[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)

The subject of the article does not satisfy WP:MN and most of the sources are self-published. A previous ProD was disputed by another editor, but their subsequent contributions have not shown that the article's subject is notable. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:10, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally nominating SEAMUS Lifetime Achievement Award for the same reasons. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:36, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and United States. 19:27, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:45, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep This article does not fall under WP:MN as it isn't a music group but is a nonprofit organization so it needs to pass WP:ORG not WP:MN. I've gone through the article and removed a large chunk of it, added sources to support WP:NONPROFIT. This group is interesting in that it's basically an academic society, for example the president of the org is a professor at NYU and many members of their board are academics or teachers. But since it's a musical society their conferences are also public music events. I've added a source table for all of the sources that are on the article as of now. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 21:18, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
seamusonline.org	Website for the organization	Website for the organization	Website for the organization	✘ No
Iowa City Press-Citizen	Local newspaper without ties to the org	Does not appear to be biased	Local newspaper covering a conference the org is hosting	✔ Yes
The Post-Crescent	Local newspaper without ties to the org	Does not appear to be biased	Local newspaper covering an event the org is hosting	✔ Yes
The Missoulian. Missoula	Local newspaper without ties to the org	Does not appear to be biased	Mentions that local students were selected to attend and perform at a conference that the org puts on	✘ No
The Roanoke Times	Local newspaper without ties to the org	Does not appear to be biased	~ Mentions the organization but it is not the main topic of the article, but it is an important part of the article	~ Partial
Dartmouth Library Archives & Manuscripts	Academic library	Academic library	~ Coverage is about one of the founder of the org, but it does mention the org and his role in it.	~ Partial
College Music Society	Nonprofit org that promotes music teaching	~ Article talks about the founding of the org and is written by one of the founders of the org	Article is only about the org	~ Partial
seamusonline.org	Website for the organization	Website for the organization	Website for the organization	✘ No
OCLC WorldCat	~ Link to a database	~ Link to a database	~ Covers the journal that the org publishes	~ Partial
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using ((source assess table)).

@Dr vulpes: Thanks for your contributions! I didn't actually yet have access to the Wikipedia Library when I opened this discussion, and missed the newspaper articles as they didn't turn up in Google searches. I'm willing to withdraw the nomination after reading the sources you added. I think it'd be fair to merge SEAMUS Lifetime Achievement Award in as a section for this article, as it probably fails WP:GNG on its own. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 11:18 PM, March 26, 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good to me this one was tricky for sure. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 23:24, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr vulpes:

Done —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:23, 27 March 2023 (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.