Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Jay Lane, Inc.

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 redirect to Kenneth_Jay_Lane. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:44, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kenneth Jay Lane, Inc.[edit]

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

Topic fails WP:CORP notability guideline, just one 2012 routine news coverage hit; has been tagged as unreferenced since 2009 with no attempts to improve. Brianhe (talk) 00:01, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerlyHMSSolent)}|lambast 00:04, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Kenneth Jay Lane - although that article needs improving too, the designer is notable and my reaction is that we don't need separate entries for designer and business in this instance. Mabalu (talk) 10:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Having just done a quick save job on Kenneth Jay Lane, I think it is clear that the subject is notable, but it should be redirected to the designer's page. There is definitely a lot of coverage of both designer and company out there, to the point where if someone were inclined enough, they could probably work this up into an article, but my feeling is that it's best to combine. Mabalu (talk) 13:16, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Kenneth Jay Lane. It is redundant and unhelpful to readers to have this small bit of material split off from main article. I don't see any worthwhile content here that does not already exist in founder's bio, so don't see need for merge. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 11:38, 17 April 2015 (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.