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 keep per WP:SNOW. Clearly a well-known company. There are many possible sources that can be added. Bearian (talk) 15:54, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Limited[edit]

The Limited (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

• Delete. Non-notable company. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:57, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep, nominator clearly did not do WP:BEFORE. Many sources here, notability asserted as long-standing clothing chain also involved in other notable chains such as Bath & Body Works and New York & Company. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:29, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep, Plenty of sources can be found; company owns a few well known and notable companies. --Caldorwards4 (talk) 00:23, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • They used to own those other companies, but this flagship brand was spun off, so that Limited Brands owns Victoria's Secret but no longer owns The Limited itself. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:06, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, this is an overwhelmingly notable retail company; but I do wonder if we need separate articles for The Limited and Limited Brands, or whether these should be merged into one.--Arxiloxos (talk) 05:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Given that Limited Brands no longer owns Limited itself, I say yes, there should be two articles. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 05:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Fair enough, I misread the last sentence of the article and thus missed that distinction.--Arxiloxos (talk) 05:09, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Famous company., with multiple available references. DGG ( talk ) 05:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - An important retail company for several decades. I know there has been a lot of coverage -- I recognize the company name only because it was so frequently mentioned in business news stories. --Orlady (talk) 06:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per DGG and Ten Pound Hammer. I simply fail to see the notability issues here.  -- WikHead (talk) 11:01, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per DGG. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:06, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:08, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the above; notable company that's received significant coverage in multiple sources.  Gongshow ^Talk 03:12, 12 March 2012 (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.