Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Humanscale

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. -- Cirt (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Humanscale

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

Does not meet the notability criteria (including WP:ORG). The references are either not independent, or not significant coverage - for example, the New York Times reference is an interview with the inventor, and mentions chairs, but the company is not named in it. The other references do not provide significant coverage, and I could not find other reliable independent sources. I had deleted this following a Speedy Deletion tag, but restored it following a discussion, and concluded that it was not quite promotional-enough to justify the deletion. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:18, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:25, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Wired and Metropolis reference cited are independent and provide significant coverage. There are other references available, such as Forbes. Note that the article should survive if either the company or any of its products is notable—perhaps it should be renamed if a thoughtful analysis determines that the products are notable but the company is not. ^Bongo_matic 22:56, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment shouldn't this be disambiguated? "humanscale" is the scale of a human, which is the common usage of the term. 65.94.45.160 (talk) 06:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move to Humanscale (furniture maker). This business makes unique consumer products sold under its own brand, and as such those products have received independent attention from reliable sources. Human scale should also be disambiguated here; it should be about the concept of keeping things useful to human abilities, needs, and attention span, with particular attention to the defects of the metric system. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:05, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguating is not a bad idea, but no need to move, as "humanscale" is not a word, and certainly has no entry. ^Bongo_matic 15:20, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The coverage in Forbes and Wired seems to indicate notability enough to pass WP:ORG. Qrsdogg (talk) 14:55, 8 May 2011 (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.