Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grana (fashion company)


 * 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 no consensus. Opinions are divided about whether the sources are in effect advertising and should be disregarded for notability purposes, or not.  Sandstein  12:20, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Grana (fashion company)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

no evidence of notability -- references are only press releases and notices of funding  DGG ( talk ) 18:11, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   18:21, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   18:21, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   18:22, 20 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete -- an unremarkable private company; sources are insufficient to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:18, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:07, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:07, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The article notes: "At Grana’s Fitting Room, the brand’s flagship showroom in central Hong Kong, crewneck cashmere sweaters and silk joggers hang alongside poplin button-down shirts with mother of pearl buttons, nipped and tucked in all the right places. This is not a new scene — plenty of clothing brands sell nice things next to each other in specially-outfitted showrooms — but only few can keep the prices of every single item under $100. That’s exactly why Grana should be on your radar right now. In a market divided between cheap retailers and pricier labels selling elevated basics, Grana stands out with prices that are 20 to 30 percent lower than similar retailers with comparable — if not better — quality. ... Grana clothing can be described as a more affordable and less serious Everlane, or an upgraded boutique version of Uniqlo. It fulfills the needs of a growing millennial market seeking a casual luxe look. Items are simple with small functional details, like inverted pleats designed to enhance fit. Fabrics and materials span Peruvian pima cotton and Japanese denim, French poplin and Italian Merino. Everything feels soft, and sleek, and super neat. “Expensive,” suggests Grana (the person). “Except it’s not.”"  The article notes: "Luke Grana arrived in Hong Kong with no contacts, cold-calling 'angel investors' he'd found on LinkedIn armed with only his CV, a business plan, and some big ideas to overhaul fashion. In little more than two years, his eponymous clothing store amassed $6 million in seed funding and has become the go-to shop for under-35s seeking quality staples for their wardrobe. ... Quality is his other pillar. The brand uses world renowned material such as Chinese silk from Huzhou or Peruvian Pima cotton, sourced from the same mills that work with luxury brands such as Ralph Lauren and Lacoste. ... The firm is now has backing by big name investors including BlueBell Group, distributors for the likes of Christian Dior in Asia, and Golden Gate Ventures, a leading backer of start-ups in the region."  The article notes: "GREAT business ideas can come from the most unlikely places. For Luke Grana, it was Peru. While there visiting his brother, Grana was impressed by the quality of the local pima cotton. After buying up T-shirts that remarkably kept their shape and vigour after being put through the wringer, an idea started formulating. What if you could offer fashion basics in the world’s best fabrics at disruptive prices? And so, the 30-year-old entrepreneur launched Grana. ... The Grana formula has garnered the attention of investors. A test run in May, where 2000 T-shirts sold out in three weeks to customers in eight countries, proved to investors that the model worked and that customers were keen on multiple purchases. First on board was multinational retailer Bluebell Group, based across Asia, which markets, franchises and distributes luxury brands across the region, including Jimmy Choo, Paul Smith and Carven. Another 28 angel investors from Australia and Hong Kong followed. In September the company closed a $US1 million ($1.19m) funding round."  The article notes: "E-commerce fashion store Grana launched a flagship brick-and-mortar store in Hong Kong over the weekend as part of its strategy to drive sales online by letting customers try on clothing before committing to making a purchase via the web using in-store computers. This tackles a growing problem amid China's recent e-commerce boom: many shoppers complain that the product they receive looks different out of the box from the image they saw online; others find the shoes, clothing or accessory they have just shelled out on doesn't actually fit them. Grana’s first store is located in trendy Sheung Wan district. It has a full product range in various sizes and colours, and a couple of dressing rooms so that customers can try before they buy."</li> <li> The article notes: "Grana’s business model is similar to that of Bonobos or Everlane — it uses the Internet to cut out the middleman and passes the savings onto the consumer. Founded in 2014, the start-up retailer ships to 12 countries, including the U.S., Singapore, Australia and much of Europe. The brand claims to travel the world to source the best materials, like Irish linen, Japanese denim, Mongolian cashmere, Chinese silk and Peruvian pima cotton."</li> <li> The video notes: "Grana founder and CEO Luke Grana discusses his e-commerce luxury fashion brand, how the company is employing an offline-to-online retail strategy and where he sees growth. He speaks to Bloomberg's Rishaad Salamat on 'Trending Business.' (Source: Bloomberg)"</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Grana to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 07:04, 26 April 2017 (UTC) </li></ul>
 * That a Hong Kong-based startup received significant coverage in international sources like Racked.com's Vox Media (United States), Agence France-Presse (France), and The Australian (Australia) strongly establishes that it is notable. Cunard (talk) 07:04, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep – Meets WP:GNG, per a review of available sources about the company. North America1000 01:02, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as I examined the sources above and yet only found such promotionalism as "While there visiting his brother, Grana was impressed by the quality of the local pima cotton", "Quality is his other pillar. The brand uses world renowned material such as Chinese silk", "more affordable or an upgraded boutiqe version", "That’s exactly why Grana should be on your radar right now. In a market divided between cheap retailers and pricier labels selling elevated basics, Grana stands out with prices that are 20 to 30 percent lower than similar retailers", "silk joggers hang alongside poplin button-down shirts with mother of pearl buttons, nipped and tucked" and such material is not "informative in encyclopedias", "his store....seeking quality staples" are a few, since it violates our main policy WP:What Wikipedia is not which states "Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising". If anyone actually looked at the sources carefully as we should, they would see such material is not at all independent since a company's labeled pricing list is never the case at all. What WP:GNG actually says is "Wikipedia articles must have significant and independent coverage of the primary subject". The publications themselves are hosted in its "business attention" section which instantly violates WP:CORPIND. SwisterTwister   talk  02:38, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:28, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Are we being asked to believe that an article containing "That’s exactly why Grana should be on your radar right now. In a market divided between cheap retailers and pricier labels selling elevated basics, Grana stands out with prices that are 20 to 30 percent lower than similar retailers with comparable — if not better — quality." is a reliable source for anything--let alone notability?  DGG ( talk ) 04:46, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is published by Vox Media's fashion website Racked.com. The article is a review of the company Grana and its products. It is not surprising that a journalist for a fashion website did a price comparison between Grana and similar companies and reported her findings to her readers. The article also says, "In terms of price and style, Grana falls somewhere in between Uniqlo and Everlane." The journalist indicated that Uniqlo is cheaper than Grana, which is exactly what an independent journalist would do. A non-independent journalist would not include that information because that information does not promote Grana. Cunard (talk) 05:02, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * But it is explicitly an advertisement: it says in effect, shop at Grana. . And Loooking at the next reference "Quality is his other pillar. The brand uses world renowned material such as Chinese silk from Huzhou or Peruvian Pima cotton, sourced from the same mills that work with luxury brands such as Ralph Lauren and Lacoste." That's not investigation, that's copying their advertising. It doesn't matter who publishes it, an article advocating the store is an advertorial at best. Even a supposedly reputable publication publishing such ads is not longer a reliable source for that material. True fashion journalism describes, not urges to shop at a particular store. What you are in essence saying is that because traditional publishers print advertising as if it were editorial content, we should do likewise.  DGG ( talk ) 07:09, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * What you are in essence saying is that because traditional publishers print advertising as if it were editorial content, we should do likewise. – I do not believe traditional publishers print advertising as if it were editorial content. That the journalist's review of the company and its products is very favorable does not make the source non-independent or advertising. Cunard (talk) 07:46, 28 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Not enough coverage in reliable, independent sources. Sources that promote subjects this way are not independant, and DEFINITELY not reliable enough if they advertise like that.Burning Pillar (talk) 13:29, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * No undisclosed advertisements are being run in the very reputable sources Agence France-Presse, The Australian, South China Morning Post, which all provide international significant coverage of Grana. Burning Pillar's account is very new. Burning Pillar's deletion review request at Deletion review/Log/2017 March 24 was closed as, "Administrative close. We're not doing a DRV from a WP:SPA created two days ago."  Cunard (talk) 09:02, 29 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete I've reviewed the sources and without exception, they are all advertorials complete with interviews with the CEO. The references fail as they rely on PRIMARY sources for their data and are not objective articles. Cunard lists this WDD article as an example of a source that meets the criteria to establish notability. In my opinion, the article is a thinly disguised advertorial written to announce the company branching into swimwear, complete with photos featuring models posing in the new swimwear, an explanation of Grana and their business model, an extolment of the "high quality textiles and affordable retail prices" and a final mention of the latest round of VC finance. Reading the other references yield the same conclusions. -- HighKing ++ 14:22, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * That Agence France-Presse, The Australian, and South China Morning Post interviewed the CEO and included quotes from the CEO is good journalistic practice. This does not make the articles primary sources. All journalists attempt to interview and include quotes from the article subjects. There is no evidence that Agence France-Presse, The Australian, and South China Morning Post did not research and independently verify the information they included in their articles. Researching and independently verifying information is what journalists from reputable publications do. Cunard (talk) 23:47, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * When a source (such as the ones you mention) extensively quotes a company exec and builds an entire article around what that exec says (and nothing more) that the article is not objective and fails to be an *intellectually independent* source. There's no criticism in any of those articles and no quotes from independent sources and nothing to indicate that any independent verification took place. It is misplaced to take these sources as "independent" journalism and I don't believe for one second that the sources intend to promote these pieces as independent. It is literally the definition of an advertorial which is an increasingly common method for company marketing execs to "communicate" their corporate message. If this company was truly notable, sources that do not follow this pattern would exist. -- HighKing ++ 12:46, 1 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep I've certainly disagreed with DGG in the past on matters like this, where significant coverage in reliable sources is to be disregarded because it is subjectively judged to be insufficiently critical and tarred with the label "advertorial" when there is no evidence at all that that's the case. We have more than sufficient coverage on the article and in Cunard's list to pass GNG. As for the above "I don't believe for one second that the sources intend to promote these pieces as independent" -- that's obviously an entirely subjective belief that you're entitled to. But it doesn't sway me. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:26, 5 May 2017 (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.