Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2024 September 20

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Entertainment desk
< September 19 << Aug | September | Oct >> Current desk >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


September 20

[edit]

I hope this question is in the correct place?

[edit]

I apologise in advance if this is the wrong place.

I'm thinking of writing an article about a book. The problem is, the publisher, Bonnier Books, does have a small arm of the business that deals with self publishing.

The book is 'Kill the Black One First: A memoir of hope and justice' by Michael Fuller ISBN 978-1-78870-286-7. How can I tell if the book is self published? Obviously, if it was self published then I won't write the article. Knitsey (talk) 16:00, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The self-publishing platform Type & Tell closed down in 2017, so this doesn't seem to be a problem. Also the Waterstones page quotes a newspaper review, which is unlikely for something self-published. And I can't find evidence of this, but his article says the book was published on the Blink imprint, and hence not on Type & Tell (which was sort of kept in isolation by being assigned to Bonnier Books Ventures, a separate company from Bonnier Books UK which has the Blink imprint, and separate from the parent Bonnier Books).  Card Zero  (talk) 18:12, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just looked in the flyleaf and it mentions Blink there. I should have double checked, sorry about that. I can't tell from this [1] whether that means it's part of the self publish arm? Thank you so much for taking the time to answer @Card Zero:. Knitsey (talk) 18:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at all the imprints listed there, and none of them say anything suggesting "self publishing", although this one says "commercial" which sounds like the opposite. (Some of the others don't say "commercial". I don't know what that means.) I also searched the site for the author and the title, and they don't admit that the book ever existed, which is an aggravating disregard for the value of information. But where did you hear that they do self publishing, and was it under the name "Type & Tell"? That is not this, so don't worry, unless you've heard they still do it.  Card Zero  (talk) 18:48, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh heck, I'm not sure. I googled something like 'is Bonnier Books self publishing' and I think I got the explanation that a small part of the publisher does do self publishing, but mostly it's a regular publisher.
I'm wondering if Blink is something to do with Waterstones? I think it was initially released as exclusive to them?
I think I will search around for some book reviews and see where I get to. I know The Times reviewed it, I don't have a subscription but I can access it through the library.
Thanks so much for your help. Self publishing wasn't really something I had come across before I started editing Wikipedia! Knitsey (talk) 19:01, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Worth keeping in mind is that being self-published is an indicator that a book is probably not notable, but that self-published status is not definitive. Fifty Shades of Grey is not my preferred personal style, but it was originally self published and has since gone on to be a genuine best seller with sequel novels and a film series. The Martian was also a self-published novel that was adapted into an acclaimed film starring Matt Damon that was more my style. The thing that matters most is whether the book complies with WP:NBOOK, which usually requires multiple reviews by competent book reviewers published in reliable, independent sources. Cullen328 (talk) 07:37, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cullen328, I didn't know that. I just assumed if it was self published it wouldn't be notable. Fifty Shades didn't really feature on my radar, not my cup of tea, but that's a good example.
I will have a good look around to see if it complies with WP:NBOOK before I start writing anything. Thank you for the info. Knitsey (talk) 12:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The thing that matters is reliable secondary source coverage. While it's true that a lot of the time a book being self-published means few are going to pay attention to it for a variety of reasons, this isn't guaranteed. I think Cullen328's examples do illustrate that even in the ebook era, it still tends to be advantageous to have a publisher hence why those examples and others like The Rabbit Who Wants to Fall Asleep may have became notable while self-published but were able to get a conventional publisher once they received enough attention. Still for a variety of reasons including simply author's preference, there's nothing stopping a book remaining self-published even after it receives a lot of attention. Articles we have on books which seem to remain self-published include Natural Cures "They" Don't Want You to Know About, Stolen Valor and Canada's Stonehenge. To some extent Dangerous (book) although it was originally not going to be self-published. Nil Einne (talk) 08:33, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This has been an eye opener. I think that because self-published sources are generally a no-no for referencing, I had it stuck in my head that self-published books wouldn't be suitable for articles. Which obviously isn't the case if the book in question has enough significant coverage.
I need to get this week over with then I will start looking for references to see if it might be suitable for an article. Thank you everyone for the help. Knitsey (talk) 09:53, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]