Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The fashionista

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. NW (Talk) 05:08, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The fashionista[edit]

The fashionista (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Two month-old fashion blog. Only claim to notability is an interview in another blog and the fact that Grace Coddington posted a link to the blog on her facebook page. Prezbo (talk) 00:51, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, unacceptable sourcing not meeting WP:GNG. Andrea105 (talk) 01:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: She fails WP:BIO and her website fails WP:WEB. Joe Chill (talk) 01:08, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Insufficient reliable independent sources to satisfy WP:N, and no claim or evidence of meeting any criterion at WP:WEB. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:52, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete extremely unlikely a blog could pass WP:WEB in two months of existance, and nothing in the article suggests this is any kind of exception. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:09, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not the easiest article (name-wise) to find sources on, but can't find any. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 02:44, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Even though the blog is only two months old, it has had great success. The fact that you don't think Grace Coddington and an exclusive interview is enough, is weak. He has also done several exclusive interviews with notable and important people in the fashion and blog industry, which only shows the importance of the blog. And FYI, the article is on the person behind it, not the blog itself. The reason for mentioning the blog, is merely because of his success. Success has to do with the person. Thejournalist80 (talk) 21.32, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Grace Coddington could be the Voice of God herself reaching down from heaven to anoint this blog as the new messiah. It doesn't change the fact that WP:N requires significant coverage in multiple reliable independent services. One isn't a plural no matter how large you write it. If this blog is genuinely notable, it will eventually attract more coverage, and at that point you can come back and recreate the article. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:37, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Non-notable blog. Article, after cleanup (like the removal of 'references' to the blog itself, some namedropping, some unreferenced and unverified claims--including the term "socialite"), lacks content--because the subject lacks notability. Drmies (talk) 20:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. First of all, the term socialite is a term that has been washed out by time. Second, if you actually read through the references you remove, the blog isn't only made up by one person, The Fashionista, but three, and notable enough Bengt from ILVOELV is the Creative Director. To call him the editor-in-chief of his blog would not be inappropriate. Thejournalist80 (talk) 21.32, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Only one !vote per participant. Peridon (talk) 21:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • So you're saying there's collusion between the two blogs? That would discredit the one reference in the article, since it's not independent. And I don't know what you mean with "washed out"--but I won't accept "washed out" as a license that anything goes, because in that case I want to be referred to as a rock and roll god. Drmies (talk) 21:19, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, Im saying ILVOELV works for two blogs individually.Thejournalist80 (talk) 22.36, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete No indication of notability for me. Come back if it achieves notability - by Wikipedia's standards. Peridon (talk) 21:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just read through the 'interview'. First, who is the interviewer and why is he/she/it notable? Second, if that interview confers notability, then I too am a rock god. Peridon (talk) 21:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt you're up to date on your fashion blogs, but ILVOELV is one of the biggest out there. For him to do an interview, means a lot to the readers.Thejournalist80 (talk) 23.11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I am going to assume good faith, and so should you: I am going to assume that Peridon knows their fashion blogs better than, say, the pope. Drmies (talk) 00:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fashion occasionally catches up with Peridon. Just assume I'm asking the question in the same way as the judge who asked 'And who are The Rolling Stones?'. He knew quite well, but wanted the information entered in the record. Peridon (talk) 10:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that, I'm just bringing the facts to the table. ILVOELV is one of the big ones.Thejournalist80 (talk) 13.33, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_fashionista&oldid=1082631508"