Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Tlale


 * 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. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 22:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

David Tlale

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Despite claims of notability, can find nothing of real substance. TheLongTone (talk) 15:17, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  16:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  16:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Not sure I understand the deletion rationale here. Being showcased at two of the four major fashion weeks should be a sufficient claim of notability, and that statement carries a reference to a reliable source. --Pgallert (talk) 17:27, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep A media source outside of his home country describes him as "world-acclaimed", has won awards. Can't see how this article could have been nominated for either speedy or now deletion. Greenman (talk) 18:58, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The rationale is that the coverage is trivial and the "international source" flaky. New York, London, Paris Munich....nobody is talking about this guy. Google him and see.TheLongTone (talk) 15:47, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Since you are active in nominating content for deletion, I suggest taking a look at WP:BIAS. Wikipedia suffers from notable African content almost instantly being nominated for deletion by editors with a North American/European worldview. Greenman (talk) 22:33, 14 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - "Nobody is talking about this guy. Google him and see." Hey, thanks for the suggestion! I Googled and found lots of name-checks in books, not just one or two nods, but at least a dozen explicit name-checks and acknowledgements of him and his work. I see lots of news hits for his collections in a variety of sources, showing he has ongoing coverage.
 * So I went and looked him up on HighBeam. 295 articles mentioning him between 2006 and 2016. Looks pretty much like ongoing coverage. Lots of them are specifically about him, from South African newspapers such as The Independent, The Star, and The Tribune, and surprisingly, quite a number of articles from a Sri Lankan paper called The Colombo. I wouldn't call this "trivial coverage" - the sheer volume and breadth, across so many different papers, indicates he is very notable in his own country. For example, one article, Refashioning Africa, from The Sunday Independent (South Africa), dated October 30, 2011; while ostensibly about the VERY notable Ozwald Boateng, devotes several paragraphs and coverage to Tlale as an example of a local South African designer, discussing his work, business situation, and career up to that date at length. There's a lot more of this kind of coverage over the last 10 years. This guy is obviously notable enough for an article. Mabalu (talk) 23:05, 14 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Since I'm the one who started his Wikipedia page and you, user TheLongTone (talk) tagged the page for speedy deletion not once but twice, I made it a point that I read through the policy for speedy deletion and I've found this interesting line that reads "If a page has survived a prior deletion discussion, it must not be speedy deleted except for newly discovered copyright violations". And this page survived your first deletion tag. May you please point me where the copyrights violations of this page are so that I can remedy this? Bobby shabangu   talk  11:39, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Bobby, although the log shows two entries, they are from the same day and time, so that's probably a technical glitch rather than a repeated speedy deletion request. Also, to first tag for speedy deletion and then, if speedy is declined, to nominate the article for a normal deletion discussion, as has happened here, is not only allowed but standard practice. Nobody suggested plagiarism but it is always safe to check anyway. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 15:58, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to say it, but there are an awful lot of entrenched editors on Wikipedia who would rather see editors they disagree with kicked off site than have to work with them. If they decide an editor is in the wrong camp (whatever camp that might be) they can and will make that editor's life hell by reverting everything s'he adds and calling administrators down every time s'he does something incorrect. It's all well-within the bounds of what's allowed on Wikipedia, and it is almost impossible to identify or question (since no one will ever admit that they are reverting edits as a form of harassment). I've seen a lot of new editors driven off the site by that kind of obnoxious behavior. Many entrenched editors view Wikipedia as a source of political power - a way to structure public information to accord with their worldview - and there is no meaningful 'intervention' method on project that will get them to be more encouraging or cooperative. Bobby shabangu   talk  21:44, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry you feel that way, Bobby, and yes, I do notice the long list of deletion notices on your user talk. Watchlisting it got me to this deletion discussion. Yet much of Wikipedias bias is systemic, caused by the composition of its editor base and lack of perspective rather than bad intent. How often had I to point out that Tehran Times is a national newspaper just like e.g. the The Figaro is, so that notability is established by even one large article on a subject---Whether we should follow the particular narrative of either newspaper is a different question, though. We have to share English Wikipedia among all English-speaking countries, and Lesotho is as much a valued member as the UK is. That said, I wouldn't go as far as alleging intent in this particular case. --Pgallert (talk) 12:52, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets gng with ease...One might say overwhelmingly. I wonder if the nom's statement "nothing of substance" discounts fashion or African sources as non-substantive? This should be a snow keep.Jacona (talk) 23:47, 15 March 2016 (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.