Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Hernández (fashion designer)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- 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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:15, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Daniel Hernández (fashion designer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Request for deletion as per Wikipedia:Notability guidelines. Possibly self-promotion of person who is not notable, but would like someone to give it another check. Acmilan10italia (talk) 05:57, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:08, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:08, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Theopolisme 23:02, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley 01:09, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep/comment OK, I've had a quick look around (I did a couple weeks ago when this first came up, but thought I should do another check beforehand). There is coverage of this guy, mainly local Boston news coverage, but not an awful lot. Very little in Google News archive (mainly about Gabrielle Giffords's intern, and a soccer player who share the name). The article is too promotional in tone and the editor has solely worked on that page and no others. I think there is JUST enough out there, but don't really feel the need to ferret it out. The article does cite a number of offline sources which I am inclined to accept in good faith as they don't support grandiloquent claims, plus they give dates, page references and authors, enabling them to be easily double-checked. Considering these in conjunction with what is available online, I think he is just barely notable enough to squeak in, but if there had been no refs or only vague refs given, based on the tone and writing and online sources, it would have been a clear delete. Mabalu (talk) 10:35, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - single working reference is a self announcement that he launched something. Nothing to support notability, sorry. ---MJH (talk) 05:34, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 01:20, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- keep International notability, community involvement and recognition by the United States Small Business Administration are sufficient, not to mention the people recommending this article for deletion are not experience in the fashion industry. Additionally this is not an article to self promote, it is an article to inform a large audience interested in learning about the designer and how the designer evolves. User:albeiro777 (User talk:albeiro777) 12:02, 17 December 2012 (UTC) #REDIRECT [[1]] additional press and legitimate links available.[reply]
— albeiro777 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Please advise. Request for exact note on what is "too promotional in tone," for revision. Original writer/editor of this wiki piece is not the subject nor affiliated with the subject's press. Supplementary sources and news links are available to remove flag for deletion. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Prestige Communications (talk • contribs)
— Prestige Communications (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- information Prestige Communications of Boston is a P.R. firm specializing in the fashion industry. This s.p.a. account has been blocked as a spamusername. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:44, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- [http://www.prestigecommunicationsofboston.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/CineEtLaMode.jpg and Hernandez is one of their clients! --Orange Mike | Talk 21:58, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as it stands at the moment. Very 'adverty' (starting with the address in the first line) and very poorly sourced. Written by a single purpose account. Of the sources in the article, the offline sources aren't sufficiently described to enable verification, Let's Talk and Stuff magazines do not seem to be reliable sources (with an editorial team etc.), his 1999 award is cited to a 1993 article! Online I can see a few press release sources and non-independent websites. Fails [[WP:GNG] at the moment. Sionk (talk) 19:16, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Sionk - Stuff Magazine is a Boston-based publication, owned and distributed by the Phoenix Communications Group - highly respected and "reliable" within Massachusetts. (Feel free to google it.) As for Let's Talk Magazine, it's neither a physical publication or a public/profitable group, but is essentially an online/social media effort and fairly popular in Boston, especially amongst the colleges/college students. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prestige Communications (talk • contribs) 20:00, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- In other words, Let's Talk is a local blog. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:44, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. While I generally feel that Wikipedia lacks adequate coverage of fashion-related topics, this subject does not appear to pass WP:GNG. Not seeing reliable sources that discuss the subject in depth or evidence that Hernández has had an impact outside of the Boston area. He might deserve a mention in an article about Boston Fashion Week, but does not merit a stand-alone article. Gobōnobō + c 04:59, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- sidenote - Gobōnobō, would you please consider doing an article on Boston Fashion Week? As anybody who's ever seen a picture of me can tell, fashion is not my forté - I find it incomprehensible and decadent, and the style customarily used to write about it contemptible and actively repugnant; but I am told by those who do care about it that our coverage here is weak: probably a relic of gender bias. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:45, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I have access to Highbeam and saw two articles there from the Boston Herald. One is actually about Hernandez, "Salon owner puts his best face forward", (now added to the article as a ref). The other has a paragraph about him in an article about one of the contestants in the Miss Massachusetts pageant (he did her make-up and clothes), "Beauty pageant contest lets designer give her a winning look". I also added an article about him in the Bay State Banner as a ref, "Hub designer driven by deep passion for fashion". These are about the only reliable sources in the article, and the only ones I could find. But this is highly local coverage and both the Boston Herald and Bay State Banner articles are basically interviews with the subject, verging on the "puff piece". I can find no evidence of national or international impact as a designer, nor any reviews of his work in the major fashion press, e.g. Vogue, Women's Wear Daily, etc. His notability, to the extent there is any, remains very local to the Boston area. I'm pretty much inclining to "delete". The current article is horribly written promotionalism and needs swingeing copyediting, but that in itself isn't grounds for deletion. Voceditenore (talk) 11:59, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as not notable, per Gobonobo. GregJackP Boomer! 14:34, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.