Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circular 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 no consensus. The discussion was split between keeping and merging, while the merge !voters were evenly split as to target. The delete position did not reach consensus; this defaults to keep, but there is no reason that merge discussions cannot occur as a normal editorial process. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  03:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Circular fashion

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

look like an advertisement with no reliable sources Endrabcwizart (talk) 18:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:33, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:44, 28 February 2023 (UTC)


 * While there are corporations that claim to be "circular," but since the EU commission has policies centered around this term, I think it is a topic relevant for Wikipedia users and the general public. Blokkhedd (talk) 18:59, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep does not read at all like an advertisement, just the application of the principals of circular economy to fashion and textiles. Found a reliable source right here that uses the term.LegalSmeagolian (talk) 22:04, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:06, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep but the article definitely needs a more WP:PRECISE title. I removed a lot of unreferenced material that felt like OR or SYNTH.  // Timothy :: talk  08:31, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Circular economy; not enough here to merit a standalone article. OhNo itsJamie Talk 23:59, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:23, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge per Ohnoitsjamie. The sources are just overviews of circular economy in the fashion context. Those that actually mention the term circular fashion do so amid other invented circular jargon. small jars 19:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - there are lots of published papers using the term 1. Even if it is just a subset of the concept of the circular economy, thats not a reason for delete. JMWt (talk) 07:55, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: final relist. I am interested in thoughts on the merge target. Two options have been presented. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero  Parlez Moi 13:45, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: This term is virtually interchangeable with "sustainable fashion," so that might be a better merge target. small jars 14:22, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep. Seems like a notable thing, meets WP:GNG as evidenced by:
 * 1) Blum, P. (2021). Circular Fashion: Making the Fashion Industry Sustainable. United Kingdom: Laurence King Publishing.
 * 2) Circular Economy in Textiles and Apparel: Processing, Manufacturing, and Design. (2018). United Kingdom: Elsevier Science. (Section 2.3 is "Circular fashion" and coverages pages 23 to 29)
 * 3) https://www.ecotextile.com/2023031630488/materials-production-news/australia-sets-out-circular-fashion-ambitions.html
 * 4) https://www.glossy.co/fashion/weekend-briefing-the-ongoing-logistical-challenges-of-circular-fashion/
 * 5) https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230227-how-to-recycle-your-clothes (three mentions of the phrase, or the phrase reversed)
 * 6) https://www.elle.com/fashion/trend-reports/a43325427/circularity-fashion-sustainability/
 * Article could be significant expanded, no reason to delete or merge. As per WP:ATD: If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page CT55555 (talk) 23:04, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Do you think there is a consistent definition of "circular fashion" between these sources that significantly differs from the meaning of "sustainable fashion"? One of the articles contains this definition, which seems to be the same thing. small jars  13:39, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That's a great question. When I !voted I did not consider that. Now you ask, my assessment is that circular fashion (creating a closed-loop system in the fashion industry; all about movement of items) is a specific approach within the broader field of sustainable fashion (a more overarching term that encompasses a variety of practices and approaches aimed at reducing the negative environmental and social impacts of the fashion industry).
 * i.e. circular fashion is part of sustainable fashion.
 * In this context I would normally be assessing if circular fashion should be merged and part of sustainable fashion. However, noting WP:SIZERULE and that Sustainable fashion is about twice the length of the Almost certainly should be divided category, I think that supports my initial keep !vote.
 * That said, I'm an open minded person, tell me if you disagree. CT55555 (talk) 14:14, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

UTC)
 * Merge to Sustainable fashion as preferred to other circular topics. There is some sourcing for this term, but I believe the term is a quite recent neologism and a content fork of the merge target. BusterD (talk) 14:49, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Sustainable fashion as it is a subset I think Chidgk1 (talk) 10:55, 28 March 2023 (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.