Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vex collection


 * 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   delete. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:38, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Vex collection

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Deprodded by article creator. My concern remains: I can find no independent sources indicating notability for this ladies' wear collection (note that there is an unrelated home furnishing line of the same name). Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:49, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete after searching, I also can find no reliable sources for the Vex Collection clothing line that would demonstrate how it meets Wikipedia's standards for notability. Sparthorse (talk) 20:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:03, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions.  —Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Article was deprodded because the company has historical significance in the Montreal fashion industry and was in no way intended as an advertisement. Multiple web sources exist that mention this company. Jeremy09 16:03, 29 December 2011 (EST) Several sources are considered reliable. Government sources such as the "Articles of Incorporation" are not self-published. I've added a mention of Vex Collection from a news organization to further increase notability — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremy09 (talk • contribs) 21:31, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Please familiarize yourself with WP:RS. Simply existing, or being mentioned on the "web" is not enough: we have very specific guidelines on the sort of reliable source needed to establish notability. See: Notability (organizations and companies). Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * But surely after reading Notability (organizations and companies) (which I hope you have) you can understand that simply being incorporated is not enough? Also, I still don't see any news references establishing notability. I won't go on, here. The decision is now with the community. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Wait, I now see your news ref: there is a short mention in the Saskatoon Star Phoenix, which I did not find. It's very brief but it's certainly independent. If you can find more of these, it will help your case. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:42, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In more detail. The Manta reference just confirms the company exists, but does not speak to its notability at all. The government source is the same. The Kim Cloutier blog entry is a blog, so is not reliable and is about Cloutier, not Vex Collection (at most its a passing mention). The Fashion Model directory entry is again about Cloutier and doesn't even mention the Vex Collection. The Star Phoenix article is from a reliable source but is the definition of a passing mention, it is not close to substantial coverage of Vex Collection the company. So none of these demonstrate the notability of Vex Collection. Sparthorse (talk) 21:43, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have read all the informational Wiki articles that you've sent my way. I will continue to search for more independent mentions. As you can see, I'm new to Wikipedia, if you can help find other sources, please do so. Jeremy09 (talk)16:47, 29 December 2011 (EST)
 * Delete, doesn't meet any notability guidelines.  PK  T (alk)  16:22, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 18:38, 3 January 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.