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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ellecid[edit]

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

Lkutaj (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Subject is a brand of jeans. Article unreferenced with only a link to their website. No evidence of substantial coverage. Nothing more than a advert for the company. See the gallery of jeans for example. Christopher Connor (talk) 20:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No coverage in reliable sources. The article is just spam, and the images are likely taken from a copyrighted source. -- Whpq (talk) 17:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:46, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:47, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I can't find any significant coverage to establish notability. This appears just to be an ad for the company. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 08:58, 21 July 2010 (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.