- 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 delete. MER-C 03:15, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Hayden-Harnett
- Hayden-Harnett ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No coverage in independent reliable sources, which those in the article are not, so it fails WP:COMPANY. Tagged for notability since August 2008. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 20:26, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 20:36, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 20:36, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 20:36, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Delete -- an unremarkable indy design house (2 people I understand). The article has had plenty of chances for improvement, but it did not occur. Coverage that I see is shallow and mostly in advertorially toned pieces. K.e.coffman ( talk) 02:14, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. small company with insufficient RS coverage. DGG ( talk ) 16:24, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - Blatant WP:PROMO. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 12:33, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- 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.