Deletion of Permanent Black

Comment: meets GNG. Discussed in multiple, independent reliable sources, some examples: https://scroll.in/article/959293/from-asia-publishing-to-permanent-black-ramachandra-guha-pays-a-tribute-to-editors-and-publishers Scroll.In Ramachandra Guha: {{tq|"Permanent Black has published some four hundred books, by the finest Indian scholars and the finest foreign scholars on India."}}, https://www.cupblog.org/2011/12/21/interview-with-partha-chatterjee/ Columbia University Press {{tq|"We have been fortunate enough to publish in the United States books from the great Indian publisher Permanent Black"}}, https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jul/16/interview-arunadha-roy-book Guardian UK: {{tq|"Permanent Black now publishes around a dozen books a year, and has a backlist of more than 400 titles"}} (NB : {{tq|Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it '''does not need to be the main topic of the source material'''}} (emphasis added)). Existed for 20 years, highly notable author list, also significant for its origins in the rupture with OUP India. AfD is not clean up; no evidence of BEFORE
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: The notability criteria goes well beyond what is cited above as being "multiple, independent reliable sources" which is usually quoted when it is being narrowly and incorrectly interpreted as meaning that the publisher(s) should not have commercial links with the topic company. That interpretation fails to account for the requirement for references to contain Independent Content as per . The criteria also requires each reference to contain |significant coverage with |in-depth information on the company and |independent content. For me, https://scroll.in/article/959293/from-asia-publishing-to-permanent-black-ramachandra-guha-pays-a-tribute-to-editors-and-publishers this from Scroll.In meets the criteria but I am unable to locate any other references that also meet the criteria. https://www.cupblog.org/2011/12/21/interview-with-partha-chatterjee/ Thie reference from the Columbia University Press fails as a |reliable source since blogs are considered unreliable. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jul/16/interview-arunadha-roy-book This from Guardian UK is entirely based on an interview with all the information on the company provided by a founder and fails . If another reference that meets the criteria for establishing notability is found I'm happy to |reconsider my !vote but right now, the topic fails GNG/
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORGIND||WP:SIGCOV||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:RS||WP:ORGIND||WP:HEY||WP:NCORP)

Comment: the article does not establish the prominence of the organisation in question beyond the creator's own assertions. Little/no coverage in |reliable sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: non-notable publishing house with no significant coverage that justifies notability. All the sources either give a very brief description or are interviews with the founder. Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORGDEPTH)

Comment: Non-notable publishing house no  coverage  and fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:INDEPTH||WP:GNG)