Talk:Boxfire Press

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... it was created 10 seconds ago and I'm still updating. --Kyej2 (talk) 15:34, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know, I'll remove the tag. Electriccatfish2 (talk) 15:46, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Interesting that someone would delete all references to any of the press current authors, and then propose deletion complaining that it's a vanity press for its "one" author. A quick glance at its Web site would show it has over two dozen projects in the works and a lot more than one author. Shady. Kyej2 (talk) 17:30, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * looking through the history it seems to have (or had -- they keep getting removed about five different mentions in independent sources... That's more than many of the publishing stubs that have been up for years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.228.200.144 (talk) 16:29, 20 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, one person keeps removing them and calling articles that mention the press' authors and books "irrelevant". Its working with significant authors, too, like Stephen Graham Jones but that keeps getting it removed. It seems, someone has issues solely because the press was founded by one of its authors and is manipulating the article to hide neutral, relevant information that would help establish notability. Kyej2 (talk) 16:34, 20 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I found this searching after reading about the company in two well-read DC blogs today about an upcoming book, one of which, the Fishbowl DC mention, I see have been removed twice, I think, by the same person. I can't really interpret the edit history well.

Deleting Sources while simultaneously questioning notability / lack of citations
I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, so I've been searching for the what policy is here. I noticed one of the edits onthis page was "removed unsourced info" by the same user removing references and information without sources -- questionable, as I came here knowing this company and know that some of the info about theshortestfiction.com was correct. Anyway I think the policy is to insert flags, not willy-nilly delete.

So, please reference this page and use the templates as needed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Citation_needed

Also, I think this behaviour violates this page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Do_not_disrupt_Wikipedia_to_illustrate_a_point which says not not summarily delete everything that appears to be unsourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.21.117.227 (talk) 17:07, 20 June 2012 (UTC)