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. Michig (talk) 14:01, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Washington Shoe Company[edit]

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

While it's impressive that it's lasted this long, I see very little notice of it,[1][2] so I think it fails WP:CORP. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:47, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It is reasonable to believe there is plenty of coverage of this company in its history, including off-line sources. The article states it is a company that has existed since 1891. (And apparently it was started in 1891 to provide rugged outdoor boots for Alaskan gold-rushers, per nominator's link to a Kent reporter article). It's "Western Chief" brand, one of its six brands, is quite a major brand. There are reviews of its Western Chief products in major newspapers. There's a 110-year-old Washington Shoe Building in the Pioneer Square area of Seattle which was subject of some controversy in 2000 (see "In Seattle, a Cobbler's Legacy Is Being Repaired", by King, Harriet New York Times, Late Edition (East Coast) [New York, N.Y] 13 Aug 2000: 11.7. Photo of the building was included with the NYT article, including: "Mr. Israel was criticized for decades for letting his buildings decay. Ironically, Samis this summer received bad press when it refused to renew leases in the 110-year-old, six-story Washington Shoe Building at Occidental and South Jackson so that it could start rehabbing the building into apartments or offices. / Street-level tenants -- an antiques store, a picture-frame boutique, an art gallery and a kite shop -- reluctantly moved out. And so did artists who had been living illegally in studios on the five upper floors that were not in compliance with building codes."

Example hits on "Western Chief" and ("boot" or "shoe") in a major newspapers literature search for just recent times:

- "Catalog Critic: Puddle Protection" by Charles Passy. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition [New York, N.Y] 04 Feb 2000: W4.
- "Stormy weather? Take it in stride with spot-on rain boots" by Donahue, Wendy. Chicago Tribune [Chicago, Ill] 06 Apr 2014: 23.
- "50 UNDER $50 Put the light in someone's eyes with gifts that won't lighten your wallet too much" Anonymous. New York Daily News [New York, N.Y] 11 Dec 2008: 28.

I expect that searches of historical newspapers would provide more, and that as a major company there will be plenty in Seattle histories. I'll stop with this much found by me, for now. --do ncr am 20:45, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wifione ^Message 12:12, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the nom which contains links to sources which demonstrate the notability of the topic. Andrew (talk) 12:32, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the nom. "Very little notice" is not enough for the notability of a corp. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 14:56, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Their are several topics to do with them that have some notability, but not sure they have any themselves. Did just track this down, re: a seemingly notable court case they were involved in. SeattlePI, 2. Their old building itself is moderately notable, Zynga now has its engineering center there per GeekWire plus its age and historic stats. All I can find on the actual company is an article noting they have a contract with Warner Brothers to release licensed boots and the already linked article from the Kent Reporter. But I suspect no matter how much googling I do, without access to an archive of historic paper I'm unlikely to find anything. Also, their own website is not working for me at all. JTdale ^Talk 15:20, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. I added a section on the court case to the article, and Washington Shoe Co. v. A-Z Sporting Goods Inc. now redirects to that. I added other info to the article, may add about the significant building as another section, too. I continue to believe that there is extensive coverage, in total, over 120 years, mostly not online, about this company, in addition to the building and courtcase topics (each of which could merit an article) so it is best to simply Keep the article, covering them all. --do ncr am 21:45, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This subject seems to meet at least the minimum requirements for an article. Andrew³²⁷ 07:29, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, §FreeRangeFrog^croak 02:22, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 July 20. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 04:58, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This 1916 book, History of Seattle from the Earliest Settlement to the Present Time, Volume 2 says " SHOE FACTORY The Washington Shoe Manufacturing Company was incorporated January 24, 1891, with L. B. Allain, president; T. J. Thorsen, vice president and general manager, and G. M. Barber, secretary. This company opened Seattle's first real shoe factory at 807-09 Western Avenue, where it had installed modern machinery. By devoting its energies toward the making of high grade heavy boots and shoes, designed especially to meet the requirements of the outdoor workers of Western Washington, it soon built up a good business. Other grades of shoes were added and within five years the company had found it necessary to seek larger quarters at Second Avenue South and Jackson Street. The company now occupies a large factory building in the south end of the city and its product is sold all over the northwestern states." which is significant coverage of the company. 98 years later, the company is still in business. That's notability. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:28, 20 July 2014 (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.