Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Latifi Press


 * 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. (non-admin closure) — ΛΧΣ  21™  19:40, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Latifi Press

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced article about a printing company in Delhi that existed between 1933 and 1947, with no apparent relevance to an encyclopedia. I proposed deletion here on 23 September with rationale " Unsourced very short article with no real indication of notability. While the publishers of the works mentioned may merit an article, this appears to be simply a short-lived printing company". It was deprodded on 30 September with "historically important" given as the reason, but after requesting some evidence of historical importance or encyclopedic relevance on the article's talk page the same day, nothing has been presented. Google Books has no coverage, Google News only has a couple of wanted ads in Indian Express from 1944 requesting printing machines. Michig (talk) 19:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. To me, the standard GBooks search seems to produce quite a number of hits - mostly in bibliographical details from books they published, but enough others to suggest some definite historical importance as a printer and/or publisher in Delhi for the All-India Muslim League during the years immediately before Partition. For instance, it seems not only to have printed but also provided editorial office space to Dawn during its early years, and possibly have provided facilities for other Muslim League activities as well. I am not sure that I am seeing enough to justify a stand-alone article, but the Latifi Press does seem important enough to justify a mention somewhere on Wikipedia and, if so, a redirect to wherever that is. PWilkinson (talk) 14:04, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Anbu121  ( talk me ) 21:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:35, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:35, 9 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment I agree with PWilkinson there is historical import as the first publisher of Dawn which is one of the major newspapers in India. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 20:21, 9 October 2012 (UTC).
 * Comment Dawn was important newspaper of India before partition(1947) and it was the mouth piece of Muslim League and the newspaper's founder editor was none other than Muhammed Ali Jinnah, later considered as founder of Pakistan.-Rayabhari (talk) 07:03, 10 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep The press has historical importance in India and the article is encyclopedic. At present it is very short and needs lengthened/copy edited. India's important publications before independence, like Dawn, Illustrated Weekly of India were published here. -Rayabhari (talk) 06:13, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. I am not disputing the notability of Dawn, but it is still not clear why the subject of this article should have an encyclopedia article. As one of the sources cited states, Dawn was printed at Latifi Press until the publisher got their own printing equipment and thereafter it was printed at Dawn Press. So Latifi Press appears to only be a printing company that printed Dawn on behalf of a client. There must be thousands of printing companies around the world, and merely printing notable publications doesn't seem sufficient to make them notable in Wikipedia terms. The absence of significant coverage of Latifi Press suggests to me that a mention in the article on Dawn would suffice. Or am I missing something? --Michig (talk) 18:10, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It looks like Latifi Press was torched during the violence of the separation - the press is often targeted by opposition seen as agitators spys etc. I don't know enough about it but Rayabhari's comments make me think the lack of sourcing is a problem of WP:SYSTEMIC due to the language barrier and time barrier. It's not like it's totally unsourced, we have confirmed a lot so far. A good biography of Muhammed Ali Jinnah should have detail on the press we can expect to find more information (if we had access to better sources and languages). A lot of this type of sourcing might not be online. --Green Cardamom (talk) 04:44, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, Green Cardamon. Mohammed Ali Jinnah was the editor of "Dawn" which was printed at Latifi Press, and Mohammed Ali Jinnah was one of the important personalities in "freedom movement" in the context that he advocated for division of India on religious lines and that idea was considered favourably at the time of partition; and it appears that Latifi Press was one of such places where the idea of partition of India was hatched by Jinnah and others, but we need reliable souces for the same.-Rayabhari (talk) 05:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Important enough to have the information, and more helpful to have it in a separate article  DGG ( talk ) 07:18, 11 October 2012 (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.