Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Halal Socks

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. The socks may be halal, but the article is haram. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:05, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Halal Socks

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

The only thing documented by third party sources is trivia, ephemeral news DGG ( talk ) 00:12, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep MacLeans, HuffPo, NY Times....RS City... It should be a little less spammy though. South Nashua (talk) 00:17, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:FART. KMF (talk) 00:29, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:36, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:36, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:21, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Meets WP:CORPDEPTH, although perhaps on a somewhat weaker level. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:21, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DEPTH for what, exactly? One item of tabloid interest? ``— Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs) 18:46, September 8, 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:39, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:SUSTAINED. Having your 15 minutes does not make one notable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:10, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are obvious alternatives to deletion such as merger into Islam and clothing and we should prefer these per the policy WP:PRESERVE. Andrew D. (talk) 10:54, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG, the swooning was over Canadian PM Trudeau not the socks. ^{Atsme📞📧} 18:19, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Almost all media recognition is about a single event of a politician wearing the socks. Trivial. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:07, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:SUSTAINED, one instance of someone wearing the article subject does not indicate encyclopedic value.--SamHolt6 (talk) 01:24, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete GNG, NOTNEWS, and SUSTAINED check out as reasons. L3X1 (distænt write) 01:35, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Obvious promotion. Power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:21, 16 September 2017 (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.