Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The UKA Press (2nd nomination)
I'll be honest, the link-spammed "references" don't help. There might be a couple of useful ones in there somewhere but how could you tell? That there are that many references but still  or  concerns is a concern in and of itself. Unfortunately, those that I looked at didn't even mention the company at all. A reference for a book published by the company (especially one that doesn't actually |verify that the company published it) doesn't do much for meeting the requirement for "significant coverage". I'm not going to get into any of the business above but if someone wanted to go through the references and highlight the 2 or 3 they think actually provide significant coverage of the subject, I think that would help. For now (until my continued searches turn up something of worth) I'm inclined to delete per 
— [[User: Stalwart111|'''Stalwart''']][[User talk:Stalwart111|'''111''']], 05:25, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:V||WP:CORPDEPTH (Wikipedia:Notability)