Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laforet (2nd nomination)

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. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Laforet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This has been tagged for refimprove for 10+ years, so a review is in order, following the even older AfD from 2005. As it is written now it fails WP:NORG and I am not seeing any better sources. I am hard pressed finding any in-depth coverage. There are a few mentions ([1], [2]) but I am not seeing any in-depth coverage, and a lot of it seems like a rewritten press release. Can anyone find something more substantial? I'd be happy to withdraw this nom if better sources can be shown to exist (there also may be Japanese coverage that I cannot find). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:33, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:51, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete.Keep. I didn't find anything google search. if anyone want to keep this article, so improve this article and add more source.
Piotrus-The content of this article is based on its Japanese equivalent on Japanese Wikipedia. - Nahal (talk) 15:00, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Chronicle Books provides extensive coverage about Laforet Harajuku. It provides critical material about the subject, noting that "its first year in business was a flop" and "Beyond the layout, there were also early stumbles with image and branding. Laforet's first advertising campaign, designed by U.S.-based fashion illustrator Antonio Lopez—whose work was typically chic with European flair—didn't seem to click."

    Condé Nast Traveler says Laforet Harajuku is "[l]ong venerated as a standard-bearer for Harajuku fashion".

    Insight Guides says about Laforet Harajuku, "for those in search of kawaii ('cute') culture and Japanese fashions you won't find anywhere else, Laforet remains the ultimate pilgrimage".

    Rockport Pub. says Laforet Harajuku is "the department store and museum where cutting-edge original fashion has been dispatched for over thirty years" and calls it "a landmark of the Harajuku area of Tokyo".

    A Tuttle Publishing book says about Laforet Harajuku, "this historical place has contributed more than any other store to shift the center of Japanese youth fashion from Shinjuku to Harajuku".

    A second Tuttle Publishing book says "LaForet could be considered the cultural center of Harajuku".

    The Japan Times says "Teeming teen shopping haven LaForet Harajuku opened in 1978 and has been a pivotal part of Japan's youth culture ever since."

    Cunard (talk) 07:57, 24 June 2019 (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.
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laforet (2nd nomination), released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.