Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daraja Press
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Daraja Press (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No independent sources about the publisher. Suggesting redirect to Firoze Manji. IgelRM (talk) 02:10, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:52, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:52, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 03:52, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Please check the article now? Please advise if more sources are needed. Grantennis (talk) 05:08, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Here are three independent sources about the publisher: AELAQ. “Daraja Press.” The Association of English-Language Publishers of Quebec, 2023. http://darajapress.com.
Alllitup.ca. “Daraja Press,” 2024. https://alllitup.ca/publishers/daraja-press/.
Radical Publishing Futures 5: Daraja Press, 2022. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_64q7S7IB-A.
Here are the books published by the publisher available on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=%22Daraja+Press%22
Here are the mentions of Daraja Press on Archive.org: https://archive.org/search?query=%22Daraja+Press%22&sin=TXT — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grantennis (talk • contribs) 05:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
- Of those 3, only Radical Publishing Futures is not a database etc and the podcast episode is an interview with the founder. IgelRM (talk) 21:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:41, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
It's a book publisher - They are well known for their books. What are examples of sources from other publishers to substantiate relevance, that are not present here? It seems that the source requirements requested are incredibly high. If the sources provided so far are not enough, it would seem that most publishers releasing books primarily from minority authors from developing countries would be excluded from wikipedia. Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grantennis (talk • contribs) 11:38, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- It might be possible to convert the article into "List of books published by Daraja Press", but I am also uncertain if it fits the criteria. The Manji article describes the publisher and maybe it could also be expanded. What benefit to you think having a separate article has? IgelRM (talk) 14:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for this IgelRM. This is an important book publisher for marginalised voices and ideas from around the world. At the moment most of the publishers on Wikipedia are only those that publish western authors or ideas related to western perspectives. Should those be the only publishers with their own articles on Wikipedia? Publishers, by definition promote their books and not their brand - that doesn't mean they don't deserve to be part of wikipedia but it means that when we make articles for them we need to recognize that the "sources" are going to be quite different. Do you see where I'm coming from? Eager to know your thoughts. Grantennis (talk) 08:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think, but Wikipedia as an encyclopedia unfortunately can only reflect what gets covered in reliable sources and not what one believe is important. IgelRM (talk) 13:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- I was replying to your previous point on sources and your question - "What benefit to you think having a separate article has?". The benefit is(, in addition to above,) having independent presses well represented. Would it be helpful to add sources to that point? Like:
- https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/07/why-american-publishing-needs-indie-presses/491618/ or https://www.economist.com/culture/2023/11/27/small-publishers-are-sweeping-the-booker-and-nobel-prizes . These smaller publishers promote their books, not themselves. They are extremely important for writers and readers; providing a hugely important societal benefit from behind the scenes. Grantennis (talk) 15:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, if sources have systemic bias, we have to reflect those sources. A "List of books published by Daraja Press" might be better as a category. — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 14:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think, but Wikipedia as an encyclopedia unfortunately can only reflect what gets covered in reliable sources and not what one believe is important. IgelRM (talk) 13:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for this IgelRM. This is an important book publisher for marginalised voices and ideas from around the world. At the moment most of the publishers on Wikipedia are only those that publish western authors or ideas related to western perspectives. Should those be the only publishers with their own articles on Wikipedia? Publishers, by definition promote their books and not their brand - that doesn't mean they don't deserve to be part of wikipedia but it means that when we make articles for them we need to recognize that the "sources" are going to be quite different. Do you see where I'm coming from? Eager to know your thoughts. Grantennis (talk) 08:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)