Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ethical Threads

:{{la|Ethical Threads}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Ethical Threads}})

Not notable. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:58, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:04, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

• Weak Keep - there are some sources: [http://articles.latimes.com/2004/feb/21/entertainment/et-rommelmann21 LA Times] is kind of a passing mention, [http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/10/news/10iht-rlabor_ed3_.html?pagewanted=all NYTimes] discusses the company more. Also mentioned in [http://www.newstatesman.com/200206170014 New Statesman] (again, slightly passing), [http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2004/oct/07/ethicalmoney.consumerpages The Guardian] (and [http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/jun/25/glastonbury2003.glastonbury again]), and in a 2007 article in the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science ([http://www.jstor.org/pss/25097915 JSTOR]). —Tom Morris (talk) 10:50, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
• Weak Keep - I've also found some different sources which provide extra info, which I've added to article. Rwendland (talk) 15:13, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

: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.