Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elixir 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. ✗plicit 23:27, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elixir Press

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Does not pass WP:NCORP. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:28, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Companies. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:28, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Colorado and Minnesota. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:37, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - searched the typical WP:BEFORE places, newspapers.com, and PressReader - didn't find anything more in-depth than mentions. No inherited notability from association w/ notable writers, and no clear merge/redirect target. Zzz plant (talk) 01:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This is an small, independent press publishing poetry and literary fiction. These publications are not often covered in mainstream press, yet their publications play a role in literary communities. Curious why, with public funding of arts largely stripped in the U.S., librarians being fired, this is the right time to delete a small press from Wikipedia? 174.238.164.181 (talk) 13:52, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has always required that topics be notable as established via WP:RS. This article was created by an WP:SPA (which usually indicates they likely had a very close connection to Elixir Press) almost 8 years ago. It wasn't appropriate to publish articles on non-notable topics back then, either. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - my 20-minute search for references came up empty. Note that there is another, unrelated press named "Golden Elixir Press". (Note: I think this argument is from User:A. B. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:28, 23 May 2025 (UTC))[reply]
Yes, that was me. Thanks for signing for me. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:18, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing in terms of referencing that would support notability. Best, GPL93 (talk) 14:28, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is "Golden Elixir Press" a notable press by these standards? 63.135.182.71 (talk) 12:20, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure given the current referencing although it does seem to be the primary/original publisher of translated copies of several notable Taoist texts. Whether or not it is notable is irrelevant per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:27, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep— many of the authors who have been published by Elixir Press continue to be active and are producing new works. Because of the nature of Elixir’s work as an independent press focused in part on debut authors, several authors may have been lesser known at the time of their publication, but have grown in notability. Agree that to focus on the possible deletion of an article on an independent press is particularly troubling when literature and the arts are being devalued at large. 64.135.133.153 (talk) 22:59, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Press itself isn't going away, nor are the authors or published works. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of notable topics as established by reliable sources, which this article has always lacked going back for eight years now. If the argument is that it enhances this specific press or helps them maintain visibility, that is directly contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:53, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree--it is troubling given premier role this press plays and context: current state of the arts/Wikipedia's purpose/the need for public support of poetry even if things were glorious. It is one of a few presses that new poets DREAM their work will be published by. People in the poetry world look to it too, to identify and read up and coming writers. And they make beautiful books also an endangered art. KEEP! 2601:19B:4102:1370:7097:75E6:4823:96F8 (talk) 15:05, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep--This is an established small press offering a well known first book prize, which is often won by writers who go on to greater fame. Worth keeping as a listing if you are interested in accurate info about literary publishing, small presses or writers in America. Poems published by this press have been featured on Poetry Daily, The Slowdown and more. 73.61.242.125 (talk) 16:56, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment given that these IPs are all making the name (non-policy based) argument, have all never edited before, all geolocate to one of two of the same regions, and have highly specific and unusual concerns, I worry that there may be WP:CANVASSing going on here. I ask any closer to take that into consideration. Thanks! PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:11, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PARAKANYAA: Elixir Press is canvassing through its Facebook page. I won't post the link due to WP:OUTING issues but there are serious COI concerns and at least one person connected to the article/AfD sells their books on Elixir Press's website. This is looking like the abuse of Wikipedia to enhance the visibility/SEO of a non-notable (I still have yet to see a policy-based keep vote) press. Best, GPL93 (talk) 14:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete None of the references come close to meeting the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 21:19, 30 May 2025 (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.