Talk:Illusion of Kate Moss

Red links
Just a note regarding the article's red links (which I'd previously removed in my editing - apologies for that, Premeditated Chaos and thanks for your explanation). I was just of the mindset that if the La Poupée show from 1997, Voss from 2001, and Neptune from 2006 didn't already have articles by now, are they / will they be notable enough to? And if they end up having an article, they could just be linked via this one in the future? I'm still very much learning about the editing process, in order to continue to improve :) Mmberney (talk) 19:03, 24 March 2023 (UTC)


 * In general, just because something doesn't have an article doesn't necessarily mean it's not notable, it just means no one has written about it yet. All eight of my Featured Articles, including this one and its parent article The Widows of Culloden (another McQueen collection) didn't have articles before I wrote them.
 * In the specific case of McQueen, all of his collections, even the boring ones like Neptune, have enough significant coverage for articles, pretty much by virtue of how many books have been written about his career alone, even disregarding any specific articles written about individual collections. It's just that fashion is a desperately under-covered topic area on Wikipedia and no one has gotten around to writing them yet. This section of the redlink guideline suggests that plausible redlinks ought to be left alone. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:10, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback, I'll keep that in mind during future editing and article creating! Mmberney (talk) 22:07, 24 March 2023 (UTC)