Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Permanent Black


 * 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 no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 06:49, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Permanent Black

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

run of the mill publishing house MistyGraceWhite (talk) 09:13, 30 April 2020 (UTC) Nomination struck as nominator has been indeffed as a sockpuppet. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 14:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as creator, a very well-known, niche academic publishing house in India that encourages and nurtures neglected voices in Indian academia, in subjects such as history, ecology, politics; tackles subjects that big academic publishers wouldn't touch. Might not be a household name, but prominent in its space. BahrdozsBulafka (talk) 09:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: BahrdozsBulafka (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:03, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:04, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:04, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - Non-notable publishing house no WP:INDEPTH coverage and fails WP:GNG. -  FitIndia  Talk Commons 15:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sulfurboy (talk) 19:06, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, the article does not establish the prominence of the organisation in question beyond the creator's own assertions. Little/no coverage in reliable sources → Lil- ℧niquԐ1 - ( Talk ) - 22:15, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, , I would disagree with your points about its prominence. It's a little independent press that does its work quietly, so naturally there wouldn't be a tonne of news sources. It publishes world-famous academics, historians, economists. But, again, for its size, there still are sources: here's Scroll, Outlook, India Today, and then p.99 of the book Pop Culture India, where it lists PB among major Indian publishers in English (i haven't put this in yet). So, in cases like these some knowledge of local academic and literary atmosphere is required to judge its true notability. The press hasn't had a scandal so it wouldn't be plastered in newspapers, but I can assure you it is notable in the academic/literary world of a country of 1.3 billion. I hope you will not just adhere to the letter of the law, and again cite WP:GNG, but the spirit of it. After all, what is true notability? Wikipedia has enough of Justin Biebers and Lady Gagas , but not enough of little organizations/people that are doing notable work in lesser-known fields. I would request you all to rethink your vote. Regards BahrdozsBulafka (talk) 06:28, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'm not sure why you tagged me and said you disagree with me, I only relisted this discussion. I will say though, if you want a shot at this being kept, you probably need to stick to the notability guidelines and show how this passes those. Going on tangents about the Biebs or the Gaga likely won't get you far. BOL Sulfurboy (talk) 07:15, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry, I did a blind blanket ping there..! Okay, I don't know how many other sources are required...if an indie publisher being covered by a country's national platforms, magazines isn't deemed noteworthy, no other links will be able to satisfy such stringent criteria...and there's no way it can be reported in prestige US media like New York Times or Washington Post, but still I found a concessionary Guardian UK link. I've put it in...(have also struck my tangential comment, with apologies to Bieber and Gaga!) BahrdozsBulafka (talk) 12:09, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

MistyGraceWhite (talk) 15:56, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Comment struck from indefinitely banned sockpuppet.--Goldsztajn (talk) 20:24, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep meets GNG. Discussed in multiple, independent reliable sources, some examples: Scroll.In Ramachandra Guha: "Permanent Black has published some four hundred books, by the finest Indian scholars and the finest foreign scholars on India.", Columbia University Press "We have been fortunate enough to publish in the United States books from the great Indian publisher Permanent Black", Guardian UK: "Permanent Black now publishes around a dozen books a year, and has a backlist of more than 400 titles" (NB WP:SIGCOV: Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material (emphasis added)). Existed for 20 years, highly notable author list, also significant for its origins in the rupture with OUP India. AfD is not clean up; no evidence of BEFORE.--Goldsztajn (talk) 15:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It's Columbia University Press (a highly reputable academic publisher) indicating the nature of its relationship to the subject of the article. It establishes notability and would be no different than providing a catalogue of joint publications, but this is a faster and more accessible way to establish that. Regards,--Goldsztajn (talk) 16:08, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:12, 15 May 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relist discussion based on request on my talk page, since nominator has been indeffed as a sock.
 * Delete non-notable publishing house with no significant coverage that justifies notability. All the sources either give a very brief description or are interviews with the founder. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 10:39, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete The notability criteria goes well beyond what is cited above as being "multiple, independent reliable sources" which is usually quoted when it is being narrowly and incorrectly interpreted as meaning that the publisher(s) should not have commercial links with the topic company. That interpretation fails to account for the requirement for references to contain Independent Content as per WP:ORGIND. The criteria also requires each reference to contain significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and independent content. For me, this from Scroll.In meets the criteria but I am unable to locate any other references that also meet the criteria. Thie reference from the Columbia University Press fails as a reliable source since blogs are considered unreliable. This from Guardian UK is entirely based on an interview with all the information on the company provided by a founder and fails WP:ORGIND. If another reference that meets the criteria for establishing notability is found I'm happy to reconsider my !vote but right now, the topic fails GNG/WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 15:33, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 14:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment more sources:
 * 1) Indian Sociological Society Lifetime Achievement Awards criteria: The scholar must have at least ten publications from reputed journals like Contributions to Indian Sociology, Sociological Bulletin, Economic and Political Weekly, The Eastern Anthropologist and books from reputed publishers like Oxford University Press, Sage Publications, Orient Longman/Blackswan, Permanent Black...
 * 2) Referred to as "notable" in The Business Standard (India's equivalent of The Financial Times)
 * 3) Documentation for academics by Dutch universities research grouping (SENSE) classifies refereed book publishers in three categories, top-notch (only 10, all university presses) followed by what it calls "semi-top notch" and then "others", permanent black in "semi-top notch"
 * 4) The evolution of Permanent Black illustrates how and why new publishers operate. The owner and staff associated with the firm originally had provided leadership for Oxford University Press, and then decided to use their expertise in creating another conduit for notable authors in history and the social sciences. Within a few years, Permanent Black has an international reputation and regularly publishes work by the best scholars in India and throughout the world. Many of the titles are joint publications with Western firms, usually with Permanent Black performing the editorial and production effort and then selling sheets or plates to their partners."
 * 5) Publishing firm Eland Books refers to them as: 'Permanent Black', a versatile, innovative publishing house set up in India in the year 2000 but already with an impressive backlist of 200 books and established as India's most prestigious academic imprint.
 * 6) Accounts for around 20% of academic book reviews in The Hindu's Literary Review or a little under 2% of all (fiction and non-fiction) book reviews.


 * --Goldsztajn (talk) 20:24, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.