Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Janette Ewen


 * 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.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 05:01, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Janette Ewen

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Semi-advertorialized WP:BLP of an interior designer, not properly referenced as passing our notability criteria for designers. The notability claim here is of the "person who has had jobs" variety, with no indication of the distinctions (e.g. notable awards) that it takes to bridge the gap between existence and notability -- and the references are almost entirely to primary sources that are not support for notability, with the exception of a single unrecoverable deadlink from a newspaper, which fails both the Wayback Machine and ProQuest tests (I can find no indication that the paper in question published any content about Janette Ewen on the indicated date at all). And while the ProQuest search gave me a lot of glancing namechecks of Janette Ewen's existence, I found virtually no hits about her for the purposes of establishing passage of WP:GNG -- I just get pieces soundbiting quotes from her, which is not the same thing. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to be referenced much, much better than this. Bearcat (talk) 22:54, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:54, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:54, 7 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep It looks like the WP:BASIC notability claim is interior designer and lifestyle expert, e.g. Janette Ewen Shares Her Story: Interior Design, Race Cars, and Fashion (Beyond Fashion, 2018, "a successful interior designer, TV personality, and lifestyle expert"), 10 Canadian celebrity designers dish on their best design tips (Canadian Living, 2017), 11 designers to watch out for this weekend at the Vancouver Home + Design Show (Georgia Straight, 2015), My favourite room: Janette Ewen’s bedroom (The Globe and Mail, 2014), Janette Ewen: “I do mini fashion-stories in my head” (FAJO, 2013, "A familiar face in the media"), Canadian style-makers give us a sneak peek of what's to come in 2013 (Canadian Living, 2013), Made in Canada furniture as good as it gets (Toronto Star, 2012, "Lifestyle expert Janette Ewen..."), Janette Ewen gives a voice to Canadian design (Business of Home, 2011, "first-ever Canadian Furniture Trends Display ambassador [...] A decor and lifestyle expert..."), Make the most of fall's last hurrah with a patio party (Toronto Star, 2011, "Janette Ewen, Toronto-based lifestyle expert and co-host of W Network’s Inside the Box with Ty Pennington"), Building the right environment for learning (Toronto Star, 2010, "Ewen, who is co-hosting Ty Pennington’s new home design show Inside the Box"), Ty Pennington's coming to Canada, casting for new home design series (Toronto Star, 2010, "Pennington and Canadian lifestyle expert Janette Ewen"), Lighting sheds bright ideas on space (Toronto Star, 2009, "...says interior stylist Janette Ewen."). Beccaynr (talk) 00:22, 8 October 2021 (UTC) strike !vote per 's comments below - Beccaynr (talk) 16:26, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
 * We're looking for sources in which she is substantively the subject of other people's third party and third-person analysis. Not Q&A interviews in which she's talking about herself, not listicles that just briefly quote her as offering design advice, and not glancing namechecks of her existence in articles whose primary subject is Ty Pennington. Bearcat (talk) 13:18, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  23:45, 14 October 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment From my perspective, I think the volume of coverage over time, and what the sources say about her help bridge the gap between existence and notability, per WP:BASIC, and the part of the criteria that says If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability. For example, the 2018 Beyond Fashion interview begins with a paragraph of biographical material and WP:SECONDARY commentary about her. From my view, the 2017 Canadian Living listing of tips and other similar articles make a form of WP:SECONDARY commentary when she is selected for inclusion as one of "Canada's top celebrity designers". The Georgia Straight in 2015 offers career information, with a line of WP:SECONDARY commentary, and the overall WP:SECONDARY theme is that those included are "T.V. stars and big-name designers". The Globe and Mail focuses on her in 2014, and begins with about a paragraph of biographical information. The 2013 FAJO interview includes a line in its introduction about her career, showing why they found her 'worthy of notice' to interview, and there are some leading questions in the interview with additional career information. An article like the BOH in 2011 is brief, but focused on her career. And coverage of her role in the Ty Pennington show includes WP:SECONDARY commentary such as "Ewen is also known for her offbeat style, as recently showcased in the National Home Show Dream Home" (Toronto Star, 2011), and it seems to have been spun into a series of articles focused on her and her design ideas, e.g. Toronto Star, 2010, including a WP:SECONDARY description of her as an "expert" e.g. Toronto Star 2011. Many sources above directly focus on her, and there are more sources available - from my view, the context and commentary from the sources above help make none of them trivial mentions, and help support her notability as well as a way to further develop the article. Beccaynr (talk) 14:42, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:13, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, Creating a special place for kids to do homework can help them focus on assignments and be more successful is that is straight up PR. That is very thin. He is another one Designer and editor Janette Ewen has some tips for gifts you can make at home. The coverage is made up of intervisew selling her product, or articles where she is selling products, or tip type articles, where she is employed to provide tips for her audience. Along with that are lots and lots of interviews, that fail WP:SIGCOV as they are WP:PRIMARY. The volume of coverage you see is due to her being a paid editor for the Toronto Star as well as the Global News. They are not secondary sources. A BLP must have secondary sources to prove notabilty, so why are you listing the 2018 Beyond Fashion interview, which you listed a secondary. IT IS NOT secondary. It is an interview.   scope_creep Talk  11:51, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , I appreciate your assessment, but to clarify my view on the sources: when I review interviews, I look for whether there is more than statements by the subject, including independently-reported context or commentary, and assess that as secondary, and as a partial support for WP:BASIC notability, due to how multiple sources can be combined, even if the depth is not substantial. With this subject, what is swinging my !vote towards keep is the volume of coverage over time and how many sources refer to her as an expert, which I read as a form of secondary commentary that supports her notability for an article. And as to the concern about the independence of the Toronto Star, this source publishes Journalistic Standards, which includes disclosures of conflicts of interests, and in the bylined articles posted above, there is no such disclosure in the articles that are about her ideas, not written by her. She appears to have a career that has been found 'worthy of notice' over time, and I think information from sources identified in this discussion can help expand the article in a non-advertorial way. Beccaynr (talk) 14:42, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * She is being paid to create this content, over a sustained of period of time, so there is lots and lots of stuff on it. But there has no secondary analysis of her work or life over that period. Interview's are really only viable when the subject in question is in that type of frame, for example models. That is all they have, so interview's become really important. But subject has had a really long career, and if it was special, it would be immediately visible, but it's not. So the interview's here are primary.  Essentially, your trying to spin up a continuity of work, particulalry when the context is so generalised and basic, into something that it's not. Her work is really kitschy. There is no depth to it. Where is the secondary sources that provide analysis of her work, to prove she is notable. They are not there.    scope_creep Talk  15:53, 31 October 2021 (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.