Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Organ Historical Trust of Australia

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The result was keep /nomination withdrawn. I was clearly off on this. Star Mississippi 13:51, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Organ Historical Trust of Australia[edit]

[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)

Contested PROD. While I definitely appreciate the work @Doug butler: put in, I do not believe it meets N:ORG.

Information is limited to what the organization self publishes and otherwise reports about itself. I have been unable to find evidence of others taking note of their work. While I'm not sure organizations can pass notability via citations of their consistuents' work as academics might, I also am unable to find indication that Maidment or Newton's works are highly cited as most have fewer than five citations. Star Mississippi 14:29, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Organizations, and Australia. Star Mississippi 14:29, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep has an entry in The Organ: An Encyclopedia [1], The Dictionary of Music Education [2], and a few others I found from a simple Google Books search. The journal itself seems to be fairly reputable in historical music circles too, and I will try to find more sources on my downtime. Why? I Ask (talk) 17:43, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per references cited by User:Why? I Ask? Bookworm857158367 (talk) 17:12, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above. Long-established and significant organisation in its field. I was able to find evidence of others taking note of their work very easily; the only challenging thing about this is that it's a niche field of interest. The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:09, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per The Drover's Wife. Deus et lex (talk) 10:00, 23 June 2022 (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.