Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadley Rille Books


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 04:02, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Hadley Rille Books

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This article for a non-notable small press has been mostly written by SPAs, who have at times reverted editors trying to clean it up (eg: ).

It was dePRODded with the reasoning "list contains many blue-linked authors suggesting notability; also many independent reviews linked" - but notability is WP:NOTINHERITED, so the notability of individual authors and books published by the press does not help us here. (Sidenote: the authors include, for example, Isaac Asimov, who died before the press was launched; the list of authors in this article does not indicate a working relationship with any of them. Also, it's unsourced.)

The guideline this needs to pass is WP:NORG; it doesn't. asilvering (talk) 03:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Literature, Companies,  and Kansas. asilvering (talk) 03:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Any publishing house article that touts its discovery of new talent, and then lists authors published who died years to decades before it was started (Asimov, Heinlein...), is paradoxical, and presumably self-promotional. Jclemens (talk) 06:26, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete The fact that works by notable writers are published by your press is not a sign that the press itself is notable. This especially applies when the second person on the list of writers your press published is someone who died 13 years before you started your press, and it is not like you are bringing out new works by him, just reprinting older workers. That your press gets name dropped in some reviews about a writer also does not show the press is notable. What we need is articles that give substantial discussion of the press itself, that are in reliable sources, and we lack that.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I can find a number of links that appear to be promotional/sales related in nature, but I find none in the news. If any were presented, I'd gladly re-consider... but until then I can only say that it seems to fail Wikipedia's general notability guideline.--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:35, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Notification was made about this AfD at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red. - Beccaynr (talk) 20:06, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment - I found a Nebula Award listing for 2012 and 2013 nominations for works published, and quotes from "Eric T. Reynolds, editor and publisher of Hadley Rille Books" in The Art of the Future (Publishers Weekly, 2013). Beccaynr (talk) 18:31, 6 May 2022 (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.