Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julia Clancey


 * 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 close. ~  Wi ki  her mit  00:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Julia Clancey

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable designer. Coverage is trivial, price in article smells like promotion. No claim to sufficient notability to pass WP:BIO for creative professionals. &mdash; Coren (talk) 01:42, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: She's apparently up-and-coming, but non-notable at the moment. Not only are there prices included, but some parts of the article are word for word copies from the Julia Clancey website . - Kneel17 01:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete: The subject's products appeared in fashion magazines. However, I don't see any of them on the website. I do agree, she's non-notable at the moment. And, the article has bit-by-bit pieces of plagiarism from the official website.   Mi r a n da   02:04, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I know a news release when I see one. Realkyhick 02:25, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.  Wikidudeman  (talk) 03:36, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete After she becomes more notable the article can be brought back to life.  Montco 04:09, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep sorry guys, I'm going to go the other way. Article is just not well written, thats all.  I know of this designer and putting out a successful fashion range is notable enough, sure she didnt re-invent the belt but Gucci, Prada, and D&G didn't either.  cheers Anthony Chidiac --Achidiac 11:35, 21 July 2007 (UTC), , , and  have been blocked as sock puppets. See Suspected sock puppets/Achidiac. --  Jreferee    t / c  17:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Neutral Notability is just above borderline IMHO. If the article can be cleaned up and properly sourced before the close of AfD, I'll happily add a keep vote.  As-is, it's overly advert-like in tone and relies too much on her own website for sourcing, and losing the article wouldn't be any great loss. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per Achidiac and Andrew Lenahan. She appears notable, but what a mess of an article! Autohagiography at its worst. Bearian 16:38, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Obviously this needs to be more or less scrapped in its current form and rewritten, but I think the designer is definitely notable.  (BTW I started WikiProject Fashion.)  I don't think the other voters looked through the sources for the article--one of them is vogue.co.uk, which has a full slideshow of her latest collection at London Fashion Week.  Her show was an off-schedule one, but London Fashion Week is one of the four major fashion weeks in the world, and if Vogue magazine attends your show and posts pictures of your collection its website, you're pretty big news.  Obviously she's a new designer (this is her first collection that Vogue posted a slideshow for online), but I think the other sources referenced (including  and  are at least enough for a short article. See also her website where she lists all the fashion magazines her designs have been used in--not necessarily articles, but if your clothes are in fashion spreads in Elle, I.D., Vogue, Vogue Italia, Vogue Russia, Glamour, InStyle, GQ, FHM, etc etc, you definitely should be covered here.  Calliopejen1 10:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I just cleaned it up so it's not an ad anymore. Calliopejen1 11:04, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete. Seems to me like a standard business professional in a glamorous industry. Not notable enough yet, but she could easily get there soon. Uranometria 21:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. If you are on Vogue's website, you are not a standard business professional. If you look in the drop-down box, you'll see they went to about 250 shows this season and took photos.  This means that Vogue UK (one of the most important fashion magazines) thinks this woman is one of the 250 most important fashion designers in the world right now, which I think is decently notable in such a huge industry.  If you were one of the top 250 actors in the world, to compare this to another profession, would certainly have a wikipedia page.  I'm adding new references to a The Independent piece on her.  There are certainly enough reliable sources to be had here... Calliopejen1 13:09, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete reads more like news or an advert. If you have to explain the notability in full detail to someone, then maybe they aren't that notable to begin with.  Pharmboy 15:35, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep are you fucking serious? Her designs have been featured in Vogue, Glamour, InStyle, Elle, GQ, and FHM... if thats not a notable designer... then we might as well delete them all.  ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 18:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Lets please keep this civil. We can disagree without being disagreable. Pharmboy 18:09, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. The article has changed in major ways since its nomination.  The subject meets WP:BIO by a) being the subject (or being the creator of the subject) of multiple reliable secondary sources and b)by being known for originating a significant new concept in that her fashion concepts have been recognized by the Centre for Fashion Enterprise (an internationally recognized institution) as being worth nurturing and retaining in London. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 00:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * COMMENT Like many articles, they seem to magically improve when nominated.  It is better now.  Pharmboy 00:31, 27 July 2007 (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.