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. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:57, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hoorsenbuhs[edit]

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

Promotional and non-notable. Theusual cute story of how it got started is normal promotional fare. The references are either about other products primarily or are incidental mentions or name-dropping (The NYT Magazine one, for example, is a very short fashion paragraph mainly about another company). DGG ( talk ) 00:40, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:36, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:36, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The company meets WP:CORPDEPTH. Only the Partnerships section in the article has a promotional tone, which is minor, and can be corrected by simple copy editing. Also keep per WP:NEXIST, because notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article. Source examples include, but are not limited to those listed below. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:45, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

Keep - Notable jewelry company, with national level references, a clean-up would be welcome of course. Jeremy112233 ^{(Lettuce-jibber-jabber?)} 15:57, 21 June 2016 (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.