Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Fish (fashion)

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. John254 00:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Fish (fashion)[edit]

Not Notable. Megapen (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - there is a page for the tie he is credited with designing, which I realize may smack of WP:OSE, but not quite. If the thing he designed is notable, perhaps a case can be made for notability of the designer himself. Apparently an independent source lists this info (printed book so can't be immediately verified online). Frank | talk 22:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - subject is notable for creating the kipper tie, among others; article makes mention of the notability, and I've added a few sources for him to demonstrate notability. nneonneo ^talk 22:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, major influence on the "mod" era, associated with creating the "look" for several rock bands incl. The Rolling Stones & The Who. Needs expansion & sourcing, but clearly a notable figure. --Dhartung | Talk 23:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is ths article about Michael Fish, more famous as a weatherman? Mjroots (talk) 04:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No, it is not. The kipper tie is not a "fish tie" although there may have been a pun intended in the original name. His meteorological activities would seem to preclude a hand in shaping fashion during the Swinging London era. --Dhartung | Talk 05:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He is not just notable, he is famous. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, seems notable. Stifle (talk) 18:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is so like wikipedia to have someone nominate for deletion an article about one of the major fashion designers of the 1960s and 70s while ignoring the large articles about fictional characters in video games. Last time I checked, it wasn't the obligation of any one contributor of content to add a full-blown article about a subject in order to avoid being immediately lopped off of wikipedia -- editors continually contribute. Larry Dunn (talk) 16:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 20:56, 14 May 2008 (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.