Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baggy jeans


 * 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 merge/redirect. W.marsh 19:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Baggy jeans
Unencyclopedic, unreferenced, original research, nothing to say about this topic that makes sense to cover in an encyclopedia. Merge anything useful into Jeans. GTBacchus(talk) 00:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge relevent info into jeans per nom. TJ Spyke 01:02, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. widespread, encyclopedic and verifiable from retail catalogs and coverage of various attempts to ban it. Gazpacho 01:16, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I've made a list at Talk:Baggy jeans of several statements from the article that seem to me to be original research, amounting to most of the content of the article. -GTBacchus(talk) 01:51, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I added URLs showing that the statements are not all original research. Should the article on jeans digress into a discussion of the legal issues? You're in Seattle, so you need only go to a skate park or mall and see these things yourself. Gazpacho 04:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Unencyclopedic original research.  --דניאל ~ Danielrocks123 talk  contribs   Count 02:29, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per above. --Mysmartmouth 02:44, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge into jeans, probably into "fits" section (which should be expanded). Ultra-Loser Talk 02:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and add a link to Skateboarding (and perhaps a very brief explaination) in the fits section of Jeans. -- IslaySolomon 04:42, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. The referenced article doesn't say that this cut of jeans (jean?) specifically refers to this style of jeans. "Baggy" commonly also just means "loose fitting". As such, it's unverified. eaolson 05:00, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge encyclopedic content (of which there doesn't seem to be much). --Keitei (talk) 05:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge to jeans EyeMD 05:51, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Jeans per Gazpacho's sources. Mgm|(talk) 09:49, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect To jeans, and possibly merge anything that doesn't violate WP:OR Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 11:32, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * merge with jeans, per above. --mathewguiver 21:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * KeepSpirituallaws 23:27, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * User's 2nd edit to wikipedia. Suspected sockpuppet.  Stubbleboy 12:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. I'm frankly shocked at the amount of merge recommendations here.  The phenomenon is such that plenty can be written about it, and this should obviously be kept and expanded by people familar with fashion. --badlydrawnjeff talk 02:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * There's certainly nothing to stop anyone adding that information to jeans, and when there's an article's worth of verifiable information there, it can split off quite naturaly. Meanwhile, a redirect is much more useful than the two or so verifiable sentences we've got now. -GTBacchus(talk) 08:53, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Shocked as you may be, if you could provide some sources as to baggy jeans's encyclopedic value, I would appreciate it. Please remember our tenet of WP:NOR, as well as all other policies of inclusion... (WP:V, WP:CITE, etc.) --Storkk 23:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I am shocked that something that everybody seems to know about is not deemed to be common knowledge. I am also shocked that the very same information is already included in wikipedia in a number of articles without any controversy there: Skateboarding, Hip hop fashion and others. Most of all I find it extremely disappointing that something that is so important, to the point of forming part of the core identity of many individuals involved in the alternative subcultures of skating and hip hop could be so disregarded. These individuals easily number in the hundreds of thousands in countries all over the globe. The fact that their important details would be erased from a "global body of knowledge" while some guy can list the 20 bus routes that pass through his white middle class U S of A suburb without any objection is shocking. Especially when these articles are one line each. Or worse train stations that don't even exist yet. It makes me seriously question what values are at work in the minds of certain individuals involved with wikipedia. Tiggertrouble 09:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Merger, reformater et redirecter zu jeans artikle thx Using a word such as "guy" as a general pronoun means this article is fucked up. -- nlitement [talk]  12:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep details on a social aspect and common fashion. If not keep then merge with jeans. Definitely shoud not be deleted, but more content on the history and background would befit it. Think outside the box 16:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep--84.47.110.241 12:34, 1 October 2006 (UTC) Anon IP's first edit was a consensus at this afd. Please see for evidence.  Stubbleboy 12:41, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep While "baggy" does have the general meaning of loose in the English language Baggy Jeans are a specific cut of jeans manufactured by all the major jeans manufacturers. It is one of the main contemparary cuts. There are other cuts that are also notable and all deserve their own articles covering: history, development, social uses, notable examples, pictures, etc. These include : Bell-bottoms, phat pants, overalls. To merge this article with jeans would be like merging four wheel drive and convertible with car. This article was only recently created so will continue to have more information added by more editors. If merged it will only be a matter of time before it is split again from jeans into its own article (more talk, more work). Sure one of the usually anonymous editors is a vandal (here here and edits to other pages phat pants other articles some warnings and they edit the same articles at closely related times with the same changes made as this occasionally logged in editor ) but others also contribute.
 * Merge with jeans. I don't see an article on boot cut jeans, straight leg jeans, or hip hugger jeans. Even the "flares" article pointed to by Tiggertrouble (which is a disambiguation page) leads to bell-bottoms - not bellbottom jeans. If the article was just about the fashion of baggy pants in general, that might be okay. But specifically baggy jeans? Nope. Kafziel Talk 12:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * What fashion of baggy pants in general would that be? Gazpacho 01:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Not sure I understand the question. Kafziel Talk 15:35, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge with jeans or delete as unencyclopedic --Storkk 23:01, 3 October 2006 (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.