Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sator 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 delete. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 04:34, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Sator Press

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

All of the sources, except one, are either written by the founder or simply reviews of books published by the publisher. The only exception is an interview with the founder in a magazine (Entropy), which - I believe - does not qualify as an independent source. There are some blogs but it appears that no unconnected writers or organizations have written about the company. A connection to notable people is mentioned through a literary journal, but notability can not be inherited. — Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 18:22, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep Was going to vote delete at first but did a Google News search and found bunch of other sources, including vice.com and LA Times, which I have added. I believe the additional sources make this notable enough to keep. Page still needs some work with formatting references, etc. Expertwikiguy (talk) 01:04, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, I did a Google search and failed to find a "bunch of other sources." The only ones where the articles listed above by Expertwikiguy. Looking through them only one, the LA Times article, seems to just barely pass the notability guidelines. The vice.com article is 99% about the Ken Baumann and a book he write. I think the publisher is only mentioned once in passing. So, I'm going with delete because one LA Times article that's border line trivial coverage doesn't cut it unfortunately. I'm 100% sure this article was created for advertising purposes anyway. As the person that created it also created the Ken Baumann article and they are the users onlyish edits. Outside of adding references to the publisher in other articles. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete The LA Times article fails WP:ORGIND as it is based entirely on an interview with Ken Baumann and therefore fails WP:ORGIND. I'm unable to locate any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. Topic fails GNG / NCORP.  HighKing++ 15:09, 24 March 2020 (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.