Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Malcolm Hall (fashion designer)

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. postdlf (talk) 13:27, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Malcolm Hall (fashion designer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG. All of the citations appear to be primary or trivial links to sites selling merchandise. Googling, including searches of Google books and Google scholar, turns up nothing useful. Msnicki (talk) 20:08, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Msnicki (talk) 20:30, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Msnicki (talk) 20:30, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Neutral. He does seem to be notable enough to warrant being part of an art gallery [1], but I can't find anything that talks about him specifically that isn't connected to his website. If/when more sources become available he should be added back in. It's just one of those circumstances where sadly there aren't enough reliable sources to prove notability. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 21:11, 24 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

Being represented in the Manchester Art Galleries would probably be enough for WP:GNG on its own, but along with the magnificent costume in the Victoria and Albert Museum (or V&A as it now mainly calls itself) - Britain's national fashion collection - I don't think Notability is in any sort of doubt really. Hall is a great artist and recognised as such by these two major museums. (Sorry about the order of posting, we had an edit conflict.) Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:57, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Keep - the Victoria & Albert Museum link in the article decisively proves Notability - the museum, which is Britain's primary museum of fashion and design, only collects what it believes best represents the finest and most notable designers of each generation. Malcolm Hall has created not just the costume shown at the V&A for Jimmy Page of Led Zeppelin, but for many other rock stars and celebrities including royalty - Princess Diana. But I agree that some of the article's other references could have been better chosen - remember it was written by a newbie Don't Bite The Newbies. I thought the article so obviously noteworthy even as newbie-drafted that I didn't bother looking for more sources... maybe I have to do that now. Chiswick Chap (talk)

Comment - searching is harder than it should be as a) Malcolm Hall is a law school in the Philippines; b) MH seems to have spent more time with scissors than pen (good on him); c) his real name is Malcolm Halter, which it seems he still uses. But I have found and documented some references in the article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:11, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I ran into that same problem. I'm changing my vote to neutral since I do want the article to stay but I know that this might not be enough to satisfy wiki requirements. I think part of the problem is that there are articles out there, they're just not currently on the internet. I'll keep looking. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 22:24, 24 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

Oh good, hope you find some more. The other point (re Nom) is that in the case of a fashion designer, "trivial merchandise" is hardly a fair description - a Notably successful (ok, outrageously creative) designer has, guess what, his costumes and outfits on sale everywhere! If Wren's monument is his cathedral, then Hall's is obviously his costumes. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:51, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Chiswick Chap states "Being represented in the Manchester Art Galleries would probably be enough for WP:GNG on its own, but along with the magnificent costume in the Victoria and Albert Museum (or V&A as it now mainly calls itself) - Britain's national fashion collection - I don't think Notability is in any sort of doubt really." << If true, then perhaps the solution is to whittle down the article to statements that currently have the strongest sources; readding the other content as stronger sources are found. A trip to the British Library is in order, methinks! Clockmiles (talk) 17:16, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've done a cleanup job - marked and then deleted every unsourced claim; and added a table of evidence from photographs at the Malcolm Hall.net Retro Gallery of exactly which rock musicians really did wear MH suits. I know it's not "independent" but since we all don't believe they've faked the photos, I think we can safely say it's "reliable". See what you think. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, looks good. So, am I right in saying that, since we've established that he (probably) reaches the notability required by Wikipedia (given the remaining sources), and have deleted unsourced claims, that this article should no longer be listed as an AfD? (or do we need to wait until after the 7 day discussion period?)

I do think there is potential for a great article here, given some time for research. Forgive my boldness (I am but a lowly newbie, after all!), but would it have been better for the Nom to have considered whether this article could have been improved, rather than rushing to an AfD status? Also, considering its newness, might it have been more productive to have given the contributors more time to develop the article? See WP:BEFORE (point C). Clockmiles (talk) 10:45, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you can just say "Speedy Keep" and let the nominator know that's what you think. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:10, 26 October 2011 (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.