- 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The result was WP:WITHDRAWN. (non-admin closure) Mkdwtalk 08:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Woolrich (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not notable. A claim of notability has been made, so WP:CSD#A7 is no longer appropriate. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:17, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Famous old American company, as shown by the sources now in the article and bunches of additional sources shown at GNews, HighBeam, etc. --Arxiloxos (talk) 21:23, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep No shortage of sources in Google and Google Books, and I added another to article. Did the proposer do WP:BEFORE? --Colapeninsula (talk) 22:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I have also improved the article as much as I can. Unfortunately, though, it seems the company hasn't received much news coverage in the past few years and they have been experiencing financial problems so this may be to blame. I have found several recent press releases so they may have resorted to using press releases now. However, for now, I think the article is better than before and the company has established a fair amount of notability. SwisterTwister talk 23:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep When you get see a 183 year old company it should raise some keep flags. Google news archive results as far back as 1936, and consistent mentions of "America's oldest manufacturer of outdoor wear". Several mentions in notable magazines and books: [1], [2], [3], Also, Encyclopedia.com has an article about them [4]. Mkdwtalk 02:29, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Withdraw. Although the version deleted in December clearly failed WP:CSD#A7, it's significantly improved. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 08:04, 8 January 2013 (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.