Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Permanent Black
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/
— User:HighKing, 15:33, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:ORGIND||WP:SIGCOV||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:RS||WP:ORGIND||WP:HEY||WP:NCORP (Wikipedia:Notability)