Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnny Grey (designer)


 * 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. (non-admin closure) -- Dane 2007  talk 22:05, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Johnny Grey (designer)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Still actually advertorial and puffed considering the listed sources are all either of the following: press releases or PR-like, interviews, galleries of photos and related, trivial passing mentions and any other unacceptable coverage. My own searches have also found nothing substantially better. I'll note this was actually deleted last year as G11 but was apparently restored by request. This is an interesting one, because although WorldCat lists over 2,000 books, I highly would've preferred this had been submitted at AfC, where it could have been better improved, although I haven't found any noticeable books reviews yet, the advertorial sources and information overall still concerns me. SwisterTwister  talk  22:37, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  22:40, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dane2007 (talk) 04:48, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:02, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:02, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:02, 8 August 2016 (UTC)



 References
 * Keep – The subject passes WP:BASIC per a review of available sources that is based upon coverage in bylined news articles written by staff writers that have been published in independent, reliable sources. The very minor promotional tone can be addressed by copy editing the article. Source examples include, but are not limited to those listed below. Several of these sources were present in the External links section of the article, which I moved to a new Further reading section. North America1000 05:07, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The New York Times
 * The Wall Street Journal
 * Chicago Tribune (see comment below)
 * Elle
 * The Guardian
 * Financial Times
 * Sarasota Herald-Tribune (Scroll left to see first part of article)
 * The Free Lance-Star
 * Gainesville Sun
 * Reading Eagle. (Scroll left to see first part of article)
 * The New York Times. (Describes Grey as being "one of the world’s most influential kitchen experts" in contemporary times).
 * Keep sources found by NorthAmerica1000 are ample.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:49, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - Examining these sources found that the NYT and CT are in fact the same article, simply republished so it's not actually different; the FT times only has him speak a few times and, aside from that, barely is about him. The other 2 newspapers such as ReadinEagle (1) cite Johnny himself as a source and the other thing is (2) they still are not in-depth enough. The Wall Street Journal could be acceptable but it focuses with shoeing his own clients thud could be insinuated as PR. The last one NYT is actually simply an interview which begins with a photo of himself.... The Guardian is another that is not actually focusing with him exactly. The Free Lance itself is simply a republication of NYT and even that was the one showcasing his clients. The Gainesville Sun is essentially the same and, lastly, the Elle, could be acceptable....if it was not so blatantly labeled as "Interview" at the start. My analysis here is enough to take to mind. With this, this exactly is not actually helping with the puffery if the sources (including new) themselves are not substantially enough.   SwisterTwister   talk  23:01, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I just ran a Proquest archives search on "The Art of Kitchen Design" + Johnny Grey. Note that since it was published in 1994 many searches will suffer from RECENTISM. This book garnered attention from major British and American media, not only the year it was published (KITCHEN WIZARD A COOK REWRITES THE BOOK ON KITCHEN DESIGN WITH ERGONOMICALLY CORRECT IDEAS: [DU PAGE FINAL Edition] Landis, Dylan. Chicago Tribune (pre-1997 Fulltext) [Chicago, Ill] 02 Oct 1994: 10....at the shopping stage in Balducci's, where Johnny Grey, the...to make the kitchen less of a laboratory, it brought in Johnny Grey. (No one has...easy to organize and sell." Johnny Grey kitchens juxtapose inlays, painted...), but for years afterwards ('Unfitted' Kitchens Create Home Around the Range Series: DESIGN 2000 / One in an occasional series.: [Home Edition]KOENENN, CONNIE. Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif] 08 June 2000: 1...."Johnny Grey" style as such, because he custom- designs each kitchen project....an open, sociable kitchen, a philosophy that was coined years ago by Johnny Grey...recently revised his amply illustrated book "The Art of Kitchen Design").  I did  not read all 47 sources that came up on this one search (others can be  done) I just gave you 2 form the top, ten scrolled down to # 47 (Forget sun-dried tomatoes, the new big thing is decorating, Joseph, Joe. The Times [London (UK)] 21 Mar 1997: 18.... * The Art of Kitchen Design by Johnny Grey...).  He's notable.  User:SwisterTwister, would you consider withdrawing this AFD, to save everyone's time for other things.  As you say, the article does need improvement and should be appropriately tagged for tone, sourcing.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:27, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment – I struck the Chicago Tribune source in my list above, because it's duplicative of this The New York Times article. North America1000 10:54, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Coverage identified is sufficient to establish notability. --Michig (talk) 06:25, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Article definitely needs work, like inline cites, and reduction of promotional tone, but subject appears to be notable — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrispyGlover (talk • contribs) 20:08, 14 August 2016 (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.