Draft talk:L.W. Packard

COI Disclosure

I am an employee of Minus33. I will submit all proposed content for this article for independent review following COI policy. Highland00835 (talk) 16:47, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Recreation of deleted content

This article is just a partial recreation of the deleted Minus33 article, which also attempted to link Minus33 to the historical company. Much of what is presented here appears to be wishful marketing, particlarly anything calling Minus33 the historical L.W. Packard mill, but their marketing is hellbent on talking about it being an older company. This was discussed at the prior AFD. This has gone quite far enough and Minus33 employees probably need a ban from Wikipedia for WP:PROMO ~2025-32994-24 (talk) 10:08, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

I have no knowledge of previous articles about either company. Other employees may have worked on pages that have since been deleted, but I was not involved. I have already disclosed my COI here.Draft talk:L.W. Packard#COI Disclosure Highland00835 (talk) 18:27, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

You added in the discussion section and reverted in a whole bunch of information that cannot be verified. If you have specific objections, bring them up here, don't just revert in a whole bunch of unverifiable statements about the company. You, and other minus33 employees, have shown a marked willingness to get a bit fuzzy with facts when linking L. W. Packard to Minus33. You also need to familiarize yourself with COI editing policies, which include far more than just disclosing a COI, and general editing standards, since you added a talk page message into an article that you have flagged as a draft. ~2025-34825-61 (talk) 08:29, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

The comments I'm replying to were added into the article body and reverted. The parent vs. holding company concern is legitimate and I'll fix it. Everything else is not, and I've reverted your changes.

The problems I have reversed include an unsourced statements in the lead saying LW Packard is now a holding company, an unverified and inaccurate claim that a current subsidiary, Minus33, is a joint venture with a Chinese company, and a false claim that the company has not manufactured in the U.S. since 2009.

The specific claim you removed was

It formed a subsidiary, Minus33, in 2000, which continues to operate as an outdoor apparel brand.

and

Minus33 was originally the trade name used by L.W. Packard for merino products before being repurposed as the name of a joint venture between L.W. Packard management and Chinese stakeholders to offshore production.

Neither of these statements is

[An] inaccurate claim that a current subsidiary, Minus33, is a joint venture with a Chinese company.

The claim is that it was started as a joint venture with Chinese firms, which is true according to the VOA article.

a false claim that the company has not manufactured in the U.S. since 2009.

This was a claim about L. W. Packard, not Minus33. If L. W. Packard, itself, is still producing garments then please provide a source for that and we can correct it.

Yes, at one point in history, LW Packard did form a manufacturing joint venture in China, but that’s an entirely different entity that the Minus33 subsidiary formed years later.

This article is not about Minus33 and this specifically was made clear in the article, which you removed. I've read through basically every source I could find to improve this article, and I can't find anything saying that the Minus33 that exists now is not the same company that was founded as a joint venture with Chinese firms. If this is wrong, please provide some sources showing that so the article can correctly reflect that.

The user also unjustifiably deleted very brief mention of what the company’s current products are (e.g. socks, hats) and that some products are again made in the U.S.

You need to stop trying to cram an article about Minus33 onto Wikipedia. It's been determined to not be noteworthy four times and you've been wasting editors' time for years trying to advertise your company on Wikipedia. ~2025-34825-61 (talk) 08:58, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

Heavily edited, should still stay a draft

This appears to be a WP:COATRACK to get an article about Minus33 after it was removed from Wikipedia on WP:GNG grounds four times. I've tried to edit it as well as I can, finding reliable sourcing on anything gets really tricky post-2009. There is certainly enough to establish L.W. Packard is historically notable, but there is zero activity or information of the activity of L.W. Packard following the plant's shutdown in 2009 except as a holding company for Minus33. Therefore it's missing a lot of information about the recent activity as a holding company, but holding company articles typically aren't where we write detailed entries about subsidiaries that have failed WP:GNG four times.

I'm going to suggest to any Minus33 employees that they reconsider trying to use Wikipedia to legitimize the claims that a recent subsidiary is the holding company. If you're notable, others will write about it. ~2025-32994-24 (talk) 12:48, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Addressing concerns from Minus33 employees

There was a comment added to the article here. I'll try to address some of the concerns raised as I've spent a lot of time digging through the history of this company at this point.

The problems I have reversed include an unsourced statements in the lead saying LW Packard is now a holding company

This is a fair bit of feedback and I've changed "holding" to "parent".

an unverified and inaccurate claim that a current subsidiary, Minus33, is a joint venture with a Chinese company

Well, it appears that after remaining stable since the article was published in 2017 that the article was edited seventeen hours ago. That smells. It appears that the article has been mostly blanked with the update as follows:

Clarification: The original version of this story left the impression that L.W. Packard & Co. was no longer in business. The company is still active, doing business since 2022 as Minus 33, producing Merino wool socks and outdoor clothing.

There is still a valid Voice of America citation:

So the company turned a competitor into a partner. Mr. Glidden signed a joint venture agreement with a manufacturer in Beijing to expand a small subsidiary company he started about five years ago. Minus 33 makes premium long underwear out of super-soft wool. The L.W. Packard president says the business is starting to pick up. "Hopefully a small New England company can make some profit manufacturing in China," he says with a shake of his head. "It's a daunting task, risky task, but I think we can do it. It's our wool, it's our skills, our knowledge…and it still applies." Mr. Glidden believes Minus33 will allow him and his few remaining employees to stay in the business -- even if their product labels say "Made in China."

and a false claim that the company has not manufactured in the U.S. since 2009

Every source I have found states that L.W. Packard has not manufactured clothing since 2009. Subsidiaries have. Is there a factual misunderstanding here?

Yes, at one point in history, LW Packard did form a manufacturing joint venture in China, but that’s an entirely different entity that the Minus33 subsidiary formed years later.

citation needed

The user also unjustifiably deleted very brief mention of what the company’s current products are

This is not an article about Minus33. "The company" doesn't change from context to context in this article as is most convenient for advertising purposes, it refers to L.W. Packard. If this is incorrect please provide sources we can use. I added in a reference to Minus33 purchasing the mill and using it for domestic production, since it seems pertinent to the larger article. Hopefully that suffices, though other editors may disagree. ~2025-34825-61 (talk) 10:40, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

@Highland00835 I've gone through and tried cleaning it up more, as well as factoring in your feedback. It's incredibly challenging to find reliable sources discussing L.W. Packard because Minus33 has completely poisoned the well by claiming to be the same entity as L.W. Packard on the internet (as opposed to a brand of L.W. Packard). This is going to create problems for Minus33 if their notability ever rises to a level that warrants inclusion on Wikipedia, because we're probably going to need to toss any source that states Minus33 is L.W. Packard, like you adding the Minus33 logo as the L.W. Packard logo.

There are a few remaining issues someone with the company may be able to identify, for example what year production moved entirely overseas. Let me know if there are other changes you'd like made to the article, if you can find any issues with the factual accuracy, or if there's something missing. I've also gone ahead and added a COI tag for the five (!) employees or affiliated individuals who have been trying to get a Minus33 article on Wikipedia. ~2025-34825-61 (talk) 10:54, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

• Minus33 is a business, through its parent holding company LW Packard, that has been in operation for 100 years (link)
• If it is OK for those companies to have pages, it should be allowable that a 90+ year old company have one as well. Please advise. (link)
• The company is 100+ years old with a 5th generation owner and used to be a top 10 textile Mill in the world. link)
• Additionally, the company's nearly 100 year old history in the wool and manufacturing business (link)

These are all disclosed or blatant COI accounts making the same claim that Minus33's age is a transferrable property of L.W. Packard. Neither Wikipedians nor your customers are stupid. If you keep conflating the original company with its recent subsidiary, people are going to notice and think it's strange. ~2025-34825-61 (talk) 11:12, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

@Highland00835 Look, I'm pretty over a blatant COI account accusing me of policy violations. At this point I've spent several hours trying to understand the history of L.W. Packard and digging through a century's worth of newspapers and you haven't bothered to respond to any of the requests for clarification or to explain what you think should be changed from here. A Minus33 employee, above, calls L.W. Packard a holding company and here you are upset that I made the same statement. Likewise, I've asked for a source that Minus33 isn't the joint venture with China, because that's what the sources say and Wikipedia requires we go by the sources. The draft considered will be the one here, no AfC comment is going to get editors to approve a version that's been objected to when you're engaging collaboratively. ~2025-34825-61 (talk) 18:11, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

I've reviewed the sourcing. This does not appear to pass WP:N as most sources failed WP:VERIFY and WP:INDEPENDENT. ~2025-34825-61 (talk) 13:33, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

AfC comment from article

Moving this here because it's a content discussion, which isn't what the AfC comment is for. @Highland00835: Wikipedia is collaborative. You do not own this draft and I've been trying my best to understand the history of the company. So far you haven't engaged and demand your advertorial version of the article, which isn't happening. I imagine the L.W. Packard article will get an article, but this will never be a platform for Minus33 to advertise. If you want an article about Minus33, then show the company is notable.

Comment 1:

~2025-32994-24 did some substantial editing of the carefully sourced draft I submitted, which I am largely reversing because the edits make parts of the draft inaccurate and unverified. These new problems make the page less likely to be approved, which is why I am reversing them. In case this user reintroduces problems, I would ask that editors please evaluate the draft I have finished: . I should note that I have a COI as an employee of Minus33, a subsidiary of LW Packard, which I previously disclosed on Talk. This user’s decision to remove the Minus33 logo and website from the infobox of my draft seems justifiable since Minus33 is not synonymous with the entire 109-year old history of LW Packard, so I am not reversing that. I am also not reversing the removal of a Products section, since this seems optional. The problems I have reversed include an unsourced statements in the lead saying LW Packard is now a holding company, an unverified and inaccurate claim that a current subsidiary, Minus33, is a joint venture with a Chinese company, and a false claim that the company has not manufactured in the U.S. since 2009. My original shows the latter two of these statements to be false. Yes, at one point in history, LW Packard did form a manufacturing joint venture in China, but that’s an entirely different entity that the Minus33 subsidiary formed years later. The user also unjustifiably deleted very brief mention of what the company’s current products are (e.g. socks, hats) and that some products are again made in the U.S. The user explains their POV here: Highland00835 (talk) 18:26, 20 November 2025 (UTC) Highland00835 (talk) 17:13, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Comment 2:

I’ve restored the AfC comment that was deleted by User:~2025-34825-61. Along with User:~2025-32994-24, both accounts continue to introduce severe errors and policy violations into the draft I proposed. As requested above, can you please consider this draft:]Highland00835 (talk) 17:13, 25 November 2025 (UTC)}} ~2025-34825-61 (talk) 09:28, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Sources

The following sources aren't available for free online, so I'm posting excerpts here for review. I have a WP:COI as a consultant for WhiteHatWiki, which was hired by Minus33.

"Where there's a mill" New Hampshire Sunday News (18 July 2004) Carol Carter

Back in 1994, the mill on the Squam River was still going strong. Director Dan Brown remembers it being the best year since the company was founded in 1916 (...) When the mill closed in 2002, only 100 workers were still on the payroll (...) Company president John Glidden blames the demise of this 160-year old mill on cheap imports (...) While establishing the China operation, the firm also created Minus 33, a firm that sells imported cold-weather garments for outdoor recreation (...) Company president John Glidden blames the demise of this 160-year old mill on cheap imports (...) the firm was paying $100,000 in monthly electrical bills. Property taxes, wages, benefits, and environmental regulations were taking a toll (...) So in 1999, Packard outsourced its yarn-making operations to Mexico and Canada.

"WOOLEN MILL'S SUCCESS STORY MIXES HISTORY, TECHNOLOGY" New Hampshire Business Review (24 November 1995) Chris Herbert

A private company, L.W. Packard does north of $40 million in annual sales, and at peak levels employs about 300 people, making it Ashland's largest employer (...) Sadie was Luther Packard's sister, and during the '20s, built up a substantial portfolio. But the best advice she followed was to sell her holdings just months before the 1929 crash and subsequent bear market. Which was just in time for L.W. Packard as well, because the mill business had fallen on pretty hard times. She had already sent up her son, Lawson Glidden, to work for Luther when Lawson was still a teenager. Now she sent up her stock market profits, becoming a major investor in her brother's mill, and probably saving the L.W. Packard Co. from demise. (...) A partial list of L.W. Packard clients indicate the success of this single-minded approach to customer satisfaction: Burberry, Hickey Freeman, Hart Schaffner & Marx, Calvin Klein, Perry Ellis, Liz Claiborne, Neiman Marcus, Land's End, Nordstrom, L.L. Bean, Eddie Bauer, Bergdorf Goodman and Evan Picone.

"Packard: A Mainline Mill Survives" The Citizen Robert M. Cook

One of three mills in the state that sits on the banks of the Squarn River survived the Industrial Revolution to become one of the most successful companies in the Granite State largely due to its own- ers' conservative reinvestment in the latest state-of-the-art technology. The L.W. Packard Woolen Mills in downtown Ashland has had the same workforce of almost 280 employees since the 1950s and has realized steady growth since it was bought by Luther Packard in 1916 (...)The mill produces woolen cloth of many different weights and finishes that includes a variety of different contents such as 100 percent wool.

Brucemyboy1212 (talk) 22:24, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Draftify

I'm the IP @Brucemyboy1212: mentioned in the AfC. I think this article should be draftified, as much of the work done by the COI editor was simply to restore sources removed without addressing the underlying concerns, or adding in sources that were only accessible to them while otherwise relying on sources with issues. Summarizing the concerns around sourcing as a desire to "punish" editors certainly warrants a trout.

One of my biggest concerns with this article related to Minus33 employees have not been reliable narrators on this article, using it as a coatrack for a Minus33 article they spent a decade trying to get on Wikipedia. Their first version of the L.W. Packard article was about Minus33, and when that failed they hired an outside consulting company. L.W. Packard likely warrants an article, but I don't think we can rely entirely on sources accessible only to a COI editor to establish notability when credibility issues are already a problem.

The sources added were:

• Cook, Robert M. "Packard: A Mainline Mill Survives". The Citizen.
• Herbert, Chris (24 November 1995). "WOOLEN MILL'S SUCCESS STORY MIXES HISTORY, TECHNOLOGY". New Hampshire Business Review.
• Banowetz, Jeff (25 February 2024). "Form, Fun and Function". Atlanta Constitution.
• Martin, Bob (6 October 2025). "Cat socks for a cause…". Laconia Daily Sun.
• Koziol, John (30 November 2017). "Former Ashland mill site generates numerous suggestions for re-use". Union Leader.

Of those,

1. Only search result is this article.

2. Previously relied upon in a very narrow sense due to quality issues

3. Only search result is this article. What was provided in the article was a snip of a newspaper with no context for if its an advertorial or editorial independence.

4. Appears to be a marketing campaign from Minus33 covered in a local paper as mostly an advertorial

5. This article was actively edited by the newspaper at the request of Minus33 after Minus33 didn't like how the article was used on Wikipedia. This has been discussed elsewhere on this page and in the AfC. It should not be relied on per WP:IS.

Additionally, the Textile World content was added back in despite WP:TRADES and it being previously commented on as a subpar source in the AFC decline.

I did check it and it did not cite to press releases or unreliable sources, as claimed:

The link to a diff you claim doesn't make that claim is specifically referencing this and this article. These aren't reliable sources per wikipedia.

I do not think the core issues were addressed, and a COI editor should certainly take more care with the sources and misrepresenting old AfC arguments. There is clearly a specifically desired historiography from the subsidiary that they want on Wikipedia, and we can't rely on sources that are only accessible to a COI editor to establish notability. ~2026-26288-29 (talk) 09:43, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

While I've requested draftification at AfD, I can't do that myself. @Nighfidelity, as the person who approved the AfC would you mind looking over this again? I don't exactly think the COI editor did a stellar job presenting the prior arguments and the version that got approved relied on previously removed sources that failed WP:V without them passing WP:V first. ~2026-26288-29 (talk) 09:52, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Yikes. With your info, I'll do so. Nighfidelity (talk) 13:30, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

On the use of "Former Ashland mill site generates numerous suggestions for re-use"

As the above IP:

I think I'm the only one aware of the issue with editorial independence on the Union Leader article. There is not archived copy of it from before Minus 33 employees complained and had the article updated on Nov 21st, 2025. I don't recall a change to correct a factual error, but rather to change the impression the article gave as it was used on this Wikipedia article:

Clarification: The original version of this story left the impression that L.W. Packard & Co. was no longer in business. The company is still active, doing business since 2022 as Minus 33, producing Merino wool socks and outdoor clothing.

The article previously had talked about the closing of L.W. Packard, and instead was blanked entirely with this note from the editor. As this was not a change to a factual issue, but rather an apparent tonal objection eight years after the fact, I do not believe the Union Leader can be relied on in this article per WP:IS and the idea of avoding undue attention to the subject's own views.

This can all be verified by cross referencing Minus33's editing behaviour on here, archive.org's copies, and the note on the UL article pertaining directly to how the source was relied on on wikipedia. I would suggest that stemming from this, L.W. Packard as an article should take extreme care to use independent, verifiable sources, but leave that up to less involved editors.

Hopefully this will be useful for future editors. Particularly as the paid editor above summarized these concerns as a desire to "punish" editors. ~2026-34199-65 (talk) 11:51, 9 June 2026 (UTC)