Deletion of Stanford Mendicants (2 nomination)

Comment: Doesn't this pass #9 of  (''Has won or placed in a major music competition
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: for same reasons as 4 months ago in the previous AFD.  The article has, as refeerences, lengthy articles from two major newspapers, the San Francisco Chronicle and the San Jose Mercury News, satisfying  ,  , and . The nominator has demanded a new standard, beyond "substantial coverage." The place to change the notability standards is at . In addition, there are a number of articles from local or campus papers, providing material with which to write a thorough article. The group has been nominated for national awards, and has been runner-up
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RS||WP:V||WP:N)

Comment: I said I'd avoid AfDs for a while, but I had to chime in on this one. Frankly, I can't find a problem with any of the sources, and I fail to see how the article doesn't measure up to |notability guidelines, nor do I understand how substantial writeups in the San Jose Mercury News and San Francisco Chronicle aren't |verifiable, |reliable sources. (By the way - those two papers are about as "local" as the Miami Herald or the Chicago Tribune.) Regardless of how the nominator feels about the national reach of the group in question, the fact remains that the sources pass muster and support the article's notability satisfactorily. Add to that the fact that the group meets at least one  criteria, and you have a textbook example of a "keeper".  The nominator may have a better argument against the Stanford Harmonics or Vocal Point (University of Delaware), but not the Mendicants
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:V||WP:RS||WP:MUSIC)