Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dolmen 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) –Davey2010^Talk 17:31, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dolmen Press (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There are claims to WP:NOTABILITY but not substantiated. Seems promotional. Has been tagged for notability for 7 years; hopefully it can now be resolved. Boleyn (talk) 11:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:49, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:49, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:49, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
  1. Hutton, Clare; Walsh, Patrick, eds. (2011). The Oxford History of the Irish Book, Volume V: The Irish Book in English, 1891-2000. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 591. ISBN 0199249113.

     The subject is discussed in Chapter 25 of this book. The book notes on page 11:

     The book notes on page 591: The book notes on pages 633–634: The book notes on pages 1–2: The book notes on page 110:
  2. Redshaw, Thomas Dillon (May 2012). "'The Dolmen Poets': Liam Miller and Poetry Publishing in Ireland, 1951–1961". Irish University Review. 42 (1). Edinburgh University Press: 141–154. doi:10.3366/iur.2012.0013.

     The abstract notes:

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Dolmen Press to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 23:12, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep/ The material above is excellent evidence of notability . I wish we had as much good sourcing for other notable publishers. DGG ( talk ) 20:14, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Withdraw nomination Cunard, you've convinced me. Thanks for your great work. Would you be able to add some of that to the article? Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 20:33, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.