Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fenty Beauty

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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Bbarmadillo (talk) 19:23, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fenty Beauty[edit]

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

The brand was established by Rihanna and has terrific amount of press mentions. I have doubts however that it has depth of coverage and comply with notability guidelines for brands or companies. The brand was established in 2017 so probably also WP:TOOSOON Bbarmadillo (talk) 21:31, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:19, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Company is subject of broad international media coverage and discussion unrelated to its association with Rihanna.Audiovideodiscoo (talk) 21:22, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. 1 ref in the article that links to their webpage. One of many brands of cosmetics, no claim to notability. Szzuk (talk) 19:34, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article had major expansion, notability established. Szzuk (talk) 07:07, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 13:44, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Oh goodness. Ok well for one I owe Ritchie a debt of thanks as I wouldn’t have seen this except for their beginning the close which affected a different entry on my watchlist. I’ll make it my job to at least begin a broad expansion based on the virtually limitless sources, which describe the international cultural significance of this topic; maybe can get to DYK before the end of women’s history month. Two though, good lord y’all do we have a serious editor demographics problem and I haven’t the faintest idea how we’re going to make the level of progress we need on that. It’s absolutely nuts this entry is in such a state or should even seem like an AfD candidate. Actually...why did it? Even if one knew nothing more than what’s in the nomination, wouldn’t it be a valid search term appropriately redirected to Rihanna? I don’t see from edit history that we’re here because that was already attempted and reverted... I wouldn’t mention it since in any case here we are, but rushing to deletion may affect editor retention and I do think this example underscores how ill the project can afford that. Innisfree987 (talk) 16:52, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The international launch of this brand was major and extremely culturally significant. The depth of coverage is not an issue at all to meet notability guidelines. 333cale (talk) 00:19, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbarmadillo: Given that Szzuk has withdrawn the only delete ivote, this AfD is now eligible to be closed by nominator withdraw (procedure here: WP:WDAFD). Would you please consider doing so? The outcome here is now in WP:SNOW territory and it would be a courtesy to your fellow editors to allow all to move forward with other matters. Innisfree987 (talk) 18:03, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Innisfree987 will do so. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 19:04, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very much appreciated! Innisfree987 (talk) 19:10, 27 March 2018 (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.