Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scarlet Imprint

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. postdlf (talk) 22:32, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scarlet Imprint[edit]

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

Not notable. Small publishing company. Declined PROD. GregJackP Boomer! 11:08, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- A NN small publishing house. I think I suggested its deletion on the AFD on one of the novels they published. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:40, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:56, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails WP:CORP. NawlinWiki (talk) 20:59, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. After I cleaned up the article to remove the vaguely promotional prose and take away the primary, merchant, and double cites, there just wasn't enough to merit an article. A search didn't provide any further sourcing to contradict this. If anyone wants to userfy this, I have no problem with that, though. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:51, 7 September 2013 (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.