Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Warren (fashion designer)

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 delete. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:47, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Warren (fashion designer)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This page almost certainly fails WP:ARTIST despite the claim the subject is a "fashion designer." It also fails basically WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG. The subject of this BLP has received some tabloid and other fluff coverage mainly based on their associations with famous people and presence on social media -- basically a whole lot of nothing. Most of the articles cited on the page appear to be either 1) promotional pieces designed to advance the subject's relatively obscure, and apparently now-shuttered business, or social media presence, 2) primarily talk about their relationships with famous people. He's apparently also the grandson of a genuinely noted fashion designer, which is often mentioned in any of the limited coverage. This mostly seems to be someone who's on the peripheries of the celebrity gossip world and not of genuine note. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 05:05, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 08:06, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 08:06, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Looking over the references on the page, 50% of the sources seem to be due to his association with Tiffany Trump (as per nominator), as many editors would say "notability is not inherited," however there seems to be enough reliable sources in which he is a large focus of them / not just mentioned in passing (NY Times, Vanity Fair for instance). Those sources label him as a fashion designer and feature him in the article, but not fully, since he is part of a social group containing people more much notable than him. For example, the first sentence of the NY Times piece talks about his job as a fashion designer mentioned, the article then jumps to others but continues to talk about him later. Same for the Vanity Fair and Dujour sources. I found another the focuses fully on his fashion show (standard.co.uk). Would he be in these publications, if he didn't have famous friends? Not sure... but there seems to be enough there with reliable sources that mention him as one of the main subjects of the article. I agree this should have been nominated for a healthy consensus to be reached. CosmicNotes (talk) 09:01, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:23, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 15:39, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 15:39, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:50, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Seems to me CosmicNotes may be making the case for deletion. I don’t see WP:BIO met. —ThorstenNY (talk) 06:22, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: While there is a lot of coverage of this fashion designer, it is not substantial to meet WP:ANYBIO. Photos of this fellow with glam girls doesn't really give notability, nor do the antics of the Brat Pack (or Snap Pack). WP:TOOSOON applies. --Whiteguru (talk) 06:49, 24 January 2021 (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.