Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Index of fashion articles


 * 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. Dipankan ( Have a chat? ) 09:32, 2 June 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Index of fashion articles

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Unmaintained list swamped with redlinks. This is not linked from anywhere of note, nor is it acknowledged in the list of indexes. I fail to see what purpose it serves — obviously none, if no one can be bothered to take care of it. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:14, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, improve and maintain. It's an old list-of-topics article, created by merging lists of topics from numerous glossaries, indices and other sources, intended to encourage article creation. Its subject is highly notable, but very poorly covered here. This reasons given by the nominator should be reasons to improve this article, not to delete it. The global fashion/apparel/textile industry is a trillion-dollar industry that directly affects almost everyone on earth, and fashion, of all sorts, is a major driver of that industry. The fact that so many links are still red is an indication of the woeful state of fashion coverage in Wikipedia, a topic which I suspect does not get the attention it deserves because of the current demographic balance of Wikipedia's contributors. Compare and contrast the List of sexology topics, created in the same way, and for the same reason, and which was also once a sea of redlinks, which seems to have engaged the interest of Wikipedia's current editor demographic rather more effectively. If it's not acknowledged in the list of indexes, it should be put there. If it's full of redlinks, the articles should be created. At the very least, the content of useful article topics which need attention should not be lost. At the time it was created, neither WikiProject Fashion or WikiProject Indexes existed -- perhaps these projects could take this list under their wing? -- The Anome (talk) 19:51, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:10, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:10, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * :Keep' per Gene93k Anome. I did tackle some of this a while ago, creating redirects for some links and tidying other redlinks but there is so much here that it overwhelms one... Mabalu (talk) 22:15, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * please explain how it can be keep per Gene93k who merely deletion sorted this? LibStar (talk) 03:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I am a sumph. Was trying to read the code to see who voted Keep before, and read Gene93k instead of Anome. Egg on face. Note to self: Tiredness and Wikipedia do not mix. Mabalu (talk) 09:58, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: This may also be of interest to the WikiProject Requested articles. -- The Anome (talk) 11:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Unmaintained lists are fixed by maintaining them, not by deleting them. Well established type of article on Wikipedia, of an essentially navigational nature. Half the effort spent in trying to delete material that needs fixing would do a substantial amount of the fixing--nominating for deletion instead wastes everybody's efforts.  DGG ( talk ) 04:38, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep as per above. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:27, 2 June 2012 (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.