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. SarahStierch (talk) 03:14, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rena Koh[edit]

Request withdrawn

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

Can't see any in-depth coverage of this company/designer on a quick news/books search beyond random "The bride wore a Rena Koh dress" in small town press type stuff. Happy to withdraw if notability can be shown. Mabalu (talk) 10:30, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sure, she's not a global icon of fashion, and doesn't have a terrible amount of biographical coverage, but I think Rena Koh dresses meet GNG in the field of bridal gowns and her dresses have featured in enough fashion awards and publications to be noteworthy. Google image Rena Koh, looks clearly notable in its field to me.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:07, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Blofeld asked me to comment. The British Bridal Awards are the UK wedding industry's equivalent to the Oscars. The industry is huge. People spend more on their wedding than on a lifetime of movies. A prize for best "Long and Romantic" dress is enough to establish notability in itself. Google gives gives hundreds of images. Regardless of the depth of coverage of the subject's personal life, there is immense interest in her work. Clearly notable. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:19, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 01:22, 3 December 2013 (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.