Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronin Publishing


 * 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 as per positive consensus and the absence of deletion calls outside of the nominator. The article appears to meet WP:CORP and WP:GNG requirements. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended (talk) 00:08, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Ronin Publishing

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not appear to meet notability requirements for companies. Yworo (talk) 20:11, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, significant publisher of drug literature books, said books frequently cited here as reliable sources, note the number of wikilinks we have to this page. (i know thats circular logic, but it points to notability to a degree, and is intended as a spur to research). i have added works published by them from a list of fairly major authors. the company as it exists now appears to be smaller than it once was, the website is really funky, but they have a storied history. I cannot find more references that talk about them specifically, but i know they were run by Sebastian Orfali and Beverly Potter (orfali has passed away). I have no true COI with the company, only a loose connection with this literature through a previous job, and having met the authors long ago.They lived next to Barrington Hall at its lowest point, and were instrumental in getting it shut down for excessive drug use (not really ironic as they were never advocates of uncontrolled drug use)Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:21, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:41, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:41, 29 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. Multiple independent sources with in-depth coverage. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 02:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep As improved, the publisher clearly meets the GNG based on the sources currently present in the article. Jclemens (talk) 08:43, 30 September 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.