Deletion of The Artists' Studio

Comment: My personal view is that this is a loathsome article, and it breaks my heart that an encyclopedia on which I work should cover such a trivial institution. I say that with explicit regard to its position in its local community: certainly it's important there, but in the broader scheme of artistic endeavour it is of no significance whatsoever, as a cursory reading of the numerous reviews referenced in the article makes very clear. Sadly, when I check the references it is easy to see that this article meets our criteria for notability: adequate references are there, and the subject of the article clearly meets . Thus, with a sigh, I have to say that under our current community guidelines this article should be retained. This article is one of the best examples of why we need to tighten up our notability criteria, but until we do, it should stay
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORG)

Comment: The article is currently well referenced and easily passes Wikipedia:There is no deadline , Oops I mean it easily passes  Good job to
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: I am quite happy to rest upon  here; this may technically meet notability requirements, but when one uses common sense, one sees that no real claim of notability is made or even really attempted in this article - it is just a small community theater of little or no interest to anyone outside the local area. The founders may have some slight notability themselves, but if so, they should have articles of their own. If this deserves a mention in Wikipedia, it is in the Fishers, Indiana article, like any other local institution per 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (WP:IGNORE||WP:LOCAL)