Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Harache

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. I have checked all sources and numerous sources come up when I Google up 'Peter Harache goldsmith'. No valid reason for deletion. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:48, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Harache

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

Little indication from source searches (Google, Books, WorldCat) that he even exists, let alone meets GNG. DrStrauss talk 20:41, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:37, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:37, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:37, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:37, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There are really quite a lot of sources [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. One says that the "the importance of Pierre Harache, senior, to the story of the Huguenot goldsmiths settling in London... cannot be exaggerated" [11]. At the very least a redirect to Harache family would be better than deletion, but I think we have enough to source and expand this beyond a stub. – Joe (talk) 16:05, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, page 1 of a gsearch "Peter Harache goldsmith" brings up a listing of London goldsmiths that includes Harache so he did exist, also here and here that discusses his and son's works, in Huguenots in Britain and France here it talks of his patronage as being "the highest in the land" and that William III probably commissioned his work, and this, Highlights of the Untermyer Collection of English and Continental Decorative Arts lists/describes one of his works, so this looks like a keeper. wow, addendum, with the addition sources brought up by Joe Roe it is a definitely a keep, possibly with info added about all the Peters. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:38, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Being the first Huguenot to be admitted to the London Livery Company should be sufficient to keep. A Grove Dictionary should be a RS. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:38, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I stopped counting Google books references after about a dozen. Widely mentioned as a famous goldsmith.104.163.152.238 (talk) 05:27, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Joe Roe's first and third cited sources are enough for me. Passes GNG. Carrite (talk) 11:25, 9 October 2017 (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.