Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fashion

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Fashion or clothing. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Fashion|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Fashion or clothing. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fashion/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Fashion[edit]

AREA (fashion label)[edit]

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

Possible failure of WP:NCORP some of the claims are Celebrity X wore it here. Also the others seem to be puff pieces and nothing substantial Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 05:13, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Fashion. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 05:13, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject has received widespread coverage since 2019. Meets GNG and WP:NCORP- look at the Women’s Wear Daily coverage. Thriley (talk) 12:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Thriley (talk) 12:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The NY Times article is about more than just what Taylor Swift wore.We likely have GNG with the NYT and the Women's Wear article. Oaktree b (talk) 14:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Thriley (talk) 15:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I don't know about the full uppercased title, but deletion seems improbable given the sources mentioned above (and per Taylor Swift, who might not agree that it should be lowercased). Randy Kryn (talk) 15:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Leaning toward delete at the moment. I removed a couple egregiously inappropriate statements of the "so-and-so wore something to this event" variety. Even discounting those, though, mainly what I'm seeing is stuff in trade publications, which are kind of suspect in terms of demonstrating notability. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:59, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I restored those sources. You should be discussing article improvements on the talk page not in the middle of an AfD which is topic-based ie. is this topic notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. -- GreenC 18:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its an article in the New York Times about the company. Really unsure why you would remove that. Did you even look at the cited article? Thriley (talk) 18:33, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Signature Yashmagh[edit]

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

Small Emirati clothing brand with one retail location - coverage is low quality churnalism/promotional. No evidence of GNG. BrigadierG (talk) 20:41, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, and United Arab Emirates. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:19, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mint Velvet[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable clothing brand. Most coverage discussing the brand is actually coverage of its founder, Liz Houghton. In a brief search I found only two detailed writeups: this piece in Vogue which reads like a press release, and this article indicating the brand was acquired by another company in 2019. What little content is here could easily be merged to Liz Houghton. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:30, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 17:01, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Erigo[edit]

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

The company lacks sufficient reliable sources; not notable organization Jibbrr tybr (talk) 15:03, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete: not notable, delete per WP:SIGCOV (nothing official pops up on google for the first few pages) Noelle!!! (summon a demon or read smth) 16:23, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I couldn't find any reliable sources about this company. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 18:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I think that this page is very short and needs to be expanded. There is actually a sufficient number of third-party sources regarding to this brand, such as:

DDG 9912 13:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Yep, you three's search results are messed up by geolocation. WC gudang inspirasi (^{Read! Talk!}) 00:37, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Please assess newly found sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:30, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fashion Central[edit]

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

This is clearly PROMO, created by a now blocked sock puppet. It hasn't received sig/ in-depth coverage in RS, aside from some churnalism or paid coverage. Furthermore, it is not even a magazine as the article claims, but rather a boutique or maybe some e-commerce store. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG. It is not a magazine, but a shopping mall type of thing. 2A04:4A43:8AAF:F70C:B589:6E17:29C1:C9A7 (talk) 13:24, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 13:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I originally closed this discussion as a Soft Deletion, not knowing until I saw the deleted page that an earlier version on this article had been deleted as a PROD. So, it is not eligible for Soft Deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:33, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Liz, Despite my reduced activity in nominating pages for deletion since your msg on my tp, there continues to be a lack of participation in Pakistan-related AfD which is realy concerning. Can we draftify the articles at minimum if they're not eligible for soft deletion? — Saqib (talk) 20:59, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Saqib (talk) 19:21, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a decline in AFD participation for over a year now. I don't see any editor advocating Draftification so I'd rather see if this relisting encourages mor participation over the coming week. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:45, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liz, I see.. So it means some reforms are the need of the time. — Saqib (talk) 15:13, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saqib, thanks for the link to this discussion, I didn't know about it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:52, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak keep~~. Nominator is correct; the subject is a retail outlet. In general I agree that the article is promotional in tone and needs significant cleanup to become encyclopedic. However, I find WP:SIGCOV in the Express Tribune, plus the Dawn and The News sources already in the article that would clear WP:NCORP. It's a weak keep because it's unclear to me how to validate whether these examples are churnalism, and I don't know enough about Pakistani news outlets to know if they are afflicted with the issues posed by WP:NEWSORGINDIA. (RS Noticeboard discussions are mixed but appear to lean on the side of considering them RS.) I could probably be convinced otherwise but this is my take after reviewing the sources and searching for more. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:47, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Dclemens1971, The coverage in The News is based on an interview that only briefly mentions the subject, so I shall label it as a WP:TRIVIALMENTION. WP:NORG states Trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. Meanwhile, articles in The Express Tribune and DAWN , published on the same day - 29 September 2023 - to mark the subject's launch and the PROMO tone in both coverages suggests they're based on PR stuff and for PR purpose. WP:SIRS states that coverage based on based on a company's marketing materials shouldn't be acceptable for WP:N. While they're suitable for WP:V purpose, but using them to establish GNG seems inadequate given the rigorous sourcing requirements for establishing WP:N. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks Saqib. I agree with your source analysis and changed my !vote to delete. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:18, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. The magazine has just enough coverage to warrant an article. The nominator hasn't shown that the sources are actually paid for, and the claim that the article's original creators has been banned is false. Cortador (talk) 20:48, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Cortador, But I don't see enough coverage. Please see my assessment above timestamped 20:58, 17 June 2024. WP:RSNOI clearly states even legitimate Indian (as well Pakistani) news organizations (print, television, and web) intermingle regular news with sponsored content and press release–based write-ups, often with inadequate or no disclosure. Paid news is a highly pervasive and deeply integrated practice within Indian (as well Pakistani) news media so requires extra vigilance! Page logs clearly indicate this article was deleted and re-created multiple times for blatant advertising by SPAs including by now blocked Special:Contributions/Zara-ahmad and Special:Contributions/Nokhaiz Kaunpal. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 21:09, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree with Saqib's rationale above, none of the references are anything other than regurgitated company PR. Also "Mentions" and "Coverage" are not part of our notability criteria, it is the content that we look at. HighKing⁺⁺ 20:29, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]