Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vrisá (brand)


 * 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. – bradv 🍁  23:52, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Vrisá (brand)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

a non notable clothing brand fails WP:GNG. Major citations are either passing mentions or featured articles (paid). Nowhere meets WP:NCORP. JeepersClub (talk) 09:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. JeepersClub (talk) 09:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. JeepersClub (talk) 09:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Clearly fails WP:NCORP. Edwardx (talk) 17:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Not sure how it looks failing WP:NCORP. There are too many coverages in Vogue, , , . Even the required considerable coverage can be found in The Hindu reference, The New Indian Express reference , Condé Nast reference, Femina . Clearly passes WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. Fekkup (talk) 19:07, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:47, 28 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete it is very difficult to distinguish promotional coverage in this are from NPOV. Essentially all fashion magazines exists primarily for promotional  coverage. Since for such coverage it is impossible to distinguish what really deserves coverage and what doesn't really, but is in there only at hte instigation of their pressagent, this makes it very difficult oo handle this area. Given the choie between not covering something that turns out to be notable, and encouraging promotionalism  , small gaps in coverage don't harm WP, permitting anything like advertising can kill it.  DGG ( talk ) 10:43, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The conclusion of whether the topic should be kept or not is made in above comment on the subjective inconclusiveness faced when analyzing the nature of the references. The brand has too many references in Vogue, which is one of the authorities in the fashion domain. It's very hard to believe that the brand isn't notable when such references are available. This argument is being made while not even considering the other acceptable, reputed references. Secondly, I could not agree with the opinion that "Essentially all fashion magazines exists primarily for promotional coverage", which is far from the truth in my opinion. It is impossible for a non-notable brand to get featured in an internationally authoritative magazine consistently over time. Other references speak for themselves. Circling back to the first argument, any obscured subjetive inability to judge the quality or nature of the reference can't be the reason for concluding a topic as non-notable. Fekkup (talk) 21:59, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Fekkup, rather than try to wade through your long list above, why not just give us your three best sources? Edwardx (talk) 16:00, 2 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment Nominator of this AfD is a blocked sock. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 15:47, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Interesting, Qwaiiplayer. We should nonetheless continue to consider whether or not to keep Vrisá on its own merits, or lack of them. Edwardx (talk) 15:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep, There're a lot of references in addition to which are present in the article currently. The nomination seems to be done in haste as it lacked WP:BEFORE. The subject appears notable. Adequate references fulfilling WP:NCORP. Di  xi  ku  22:17, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete All of the vogue references are brief mentions in listicles with titles such as 'Vogue India picks 55 of the best looks from Lakmé Fashion Week'. There are WP:INTERVIEWs in the Hindu and New Indian Express, and another listicle called '50 brands we love' in Conde Nast. (Spoiler alert - it makes you click through, one by one. Vrisa comes in at number 19, with a single sentence of coverage). None of these sources approaches the type of coverage called for by WP:CORPDEPTH - without some substantially better sourcing, this is an NCORP fail. Girth Summit  (blether)  15:13, 4 September 2021 (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.