Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Huf Haus


 * 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) &mdash; neuro(talk) 20:07, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Huf Haus

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Completely non-notable and generally un-necessary as an article. Commercial. Technosenior (talk) 20:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep (I'm the article creator). This article meets WP:COMPANY since the company has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources, including The Times, Daily Telegraph, International Herald Tribune and Channel 4 television. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:04, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The similar article in German Wikipedia passed successful a deleting discussion there because of the several, most British (!), architecturally prices e. g. 2001 „Best House of the Year“ (Royal Institute of Architecture, London), and 2004 (earlier also 2003, 2002, 2000) „The National HomeBuilder Design Awards“. Whats true: The article could be more encyclopedia stile. Some more facts of the company like founded in 1912, 434 employees in 2007, turnover 84 Mio. EUR (2007), Homepage, unique wood-glas construction based on American Timber framing, individual floor plans (within a prefabricated house!), Bauhaus tradition, delivered around the world including Russia and China, an independent members club in Britain, available as a Zero-energy building, and all kinds of Low-energy house, normal site construction time five weeks also outside Germany, guaranteed prices, basement construction, furnishings, horticulture, financing also available, ... Tasma3197 (talk) 21:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, basically per Tasma3197, has won several architectural prices. Article could use work, in particular the cost of the houses listed should probably be removed unless there is some encyclopaedic fact about them that I don't see (WP:NOTCATALOG). The company however seems notable to me, in addition to the sources already in the article de:Huf Haus has three more:  . -- Amalthea
 * Comment - The article probably could be improved by using some of the material from . -- Suntag  ☼  17:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notability obvious from the sources that were in the article before it was nominated. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - The article had references establishing notability prior to the nomination. It was clearly notable and referenced then. -- Whpq (talk) 17:32, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep: Reliable sources shows that it passes WP:CORP. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 02:12, 10 December 2008 (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.