Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ambassador International


 * 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   keep. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:29, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Ambassador International

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is advertising for a minor publisher. Almost none of the authors or books is notable. Some of the people who have written forwards to the books are notable, but that doesn't amount to much.

The references are to directory listings for the company, and minor unreliable reviews of the books, and interviews with the various authors, a good number of them from Amazon.

I'm amazed this was accepted from AfC. I''ve notified the acceptor.  DGG ( talk ) 04:40, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:55, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:54, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:55, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep The books of a publisher do not have to be notable for the publisher to be notable. We are not giving an endorsement to the publisher as a publisher of reliable sources. We have (and should have) articles on comic book publishers. That being said it is not clear that we have citations about the publisher from trade journals or any articles on the publisher. It verges on original research but I notice other more establish publishers suffer from similar problems. I'm concerned but not yet convinced it should be deleted. Jason from nyc (talk) 12:23, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:53, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep -- Even if they are low volume publications, the number of books is enough to warrant having an article. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:59, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * 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.