Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ridan Publishing
- 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 delete. SpinningSpark 15:47, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Ridan Publishing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I came across this while looking into some edits and after removing a ton of non-usable links to various non-notable book blogs and such (original editor has been notified about WP:RS) that stated that this or that author was a finalist in some contest (some of which were non-notable in and of themselves) or that the book was well received by Joe Smith in Everywhere, USA. (Original version of article can be seen here: [1]) I did a search to find sources and couldn't find anything that was independent and reliable that showed notability for this publishing company. I found a lot of blogs (none of which are usable) that were talking about a controversy concerning the publisher, but nothing that would show notability. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 09:13, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 09:16, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:52, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete There are no sources that discuss the publisher. See WP:ORG for why the products (books, awards, authors) don't contribute towards notability. "The organization or corporation itself must have been discussed in reliable independent sources for it to be considered notable." -- Green Cardamom (talk) 19:59, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete and come back later. Clearly a real publisher (proven by the number of authors in blogs claiming that they haven't been paid). But no external references - not notable yet. --Modern.Jewelry.Historian (talk) 22:11, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:10, 17 November 2012 (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.