Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luke Hughes and Company Limited


 * 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 merge to Luke Hughes (furniture designer) (selectively) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:21, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Luke Hughes and Company Limited

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:ORG, WP:ORGCRIT and WP:NCORP. Small private furniture design firm.  scope_creep Talk  17:04, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:14, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America1000 17:44, 23 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Selective merge to Luke Hughes (furniture designer), who does seem to be notable (I'm here via the COI noticeboard). This is a transparent puff piece, written as a story rather than an encyclopedia entry and seemingly not based in the sources it cites. The company can be written about in the context of his career. Fences  &amp;  Windows  21:03, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge with Luke Hughes (furniture designer), per F&W. There is a Thames & Hudson book on his furniture, so there is notability. The best and lest promotional place to explain that notability is in a single article on him. In terms of his public notability, he and the company are one and the same. Possibly (talk) 23:42, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Selectively merge for the time being, however Luke Hughes (furniture designer) could be a candidate for AfD. See edit history. It appears to be well sourced at first but as I dig through the target page, I am finding a whole lot of invalid references that do not support the claims made. That book about his work creates a presumption of notability but further review could find otherwise. Graywalls (talk) 19:13, 24 February 2021 (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.