Talk:University press

Most -- all? -- are nonprofit
Do any exceptions come to mind? I'm wondering which of the members of Category:University presses should also be a member of Category:Non-profit academic publishers. Or if the former category in its entirety should be a member of the latter. I found this: "As nonprofit enterprises,4 university presses seek to fulfill the university's mission..." (Peter Givler, "University Press Publishing in the United States", Association of American University Presses): 4 There is a small handful of U.S. commercial publishers who use the phrase "university press" in their name. When I speak of university presses here, I mean university presses who are members of AAUP, whose Guidelines on Admission to Membership define a university press as "the scholarly publishing arm of a university or college." So it seems safe to say that all members of AAUP are nonprofit. I intend to tag article pages accordingly. I could instead create a new Category:Members of the Association of American University Presses and put it as a member of both Category:University presses and Category:Non-profit academic publishers. Your thoughts? Fgnievinski (talk) 23:13, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I find the category "non-profit academic publishers" not very useful. To give just one example: Frontiers (publisher) started out as a foundation, which are inherently non-profit. As soon as it became successful (meaning: commercially viable), it sold out to Nature Publishing Group (now merging with Springer), which decidedly is a commercial publisher. So distinctions are fluid and, very often, we will not have any reliable info on whether or not a publisher is for-profit or not. Nonetheless, we now have this cat and should apply it as correctly as possible. I agree with Fgnievinski that probably all legitimate university presses are non-profit. The proposed new category is not really needed, I think (and membership in an organization is rarely seen as "defining"). I would categorize "University presses" in "Non-profit academic publishers". No need any more then to categorize each individual university press in the latter cat once this has been done. If ever an exception would crop up, we can revisit the question. Hope this helps. --Randykitty (talk) 13:54, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I've done as suggested. Fgnievinski (talk) 19:49, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Gvtagvta 2405:ACC0:1100:EA70:B9B1:804:5484:C577 (talk) 15:06, 23 August 2023 (UTC)