Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gregory Kay

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 15:00, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory Kay

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

He is a businessman with a factory and a retail store. He has one article about him from his local newspaper. He is not Notable at all. I attempted to clean up the article by removing all the puff, but when I did, there was nothing left. You can check the Edit summary. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 23:03, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - considering its presentation along with Lightology and Tech Lighting, this appears to be self-promotion.--Rpclod (talk) 00:12, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:14, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - between the three subjects (Lightology, Tech Lighting, and Gregory Kay) there does appear to be some notability, but not enough for three articles. Normally when we discount "local" sources, we are talking about small-town newspapers, not something like the Chicago Tribune. The reason is that such papers are indiscriminate - they literally cover all businesses within the town at some point. The Tribune (and other Chicago-based sources) is a different story entirely. It most certainly does not cover every business and in depth coverage by the publication of a Chicago business carries implication of notability as in depth coverage of any other subject would. Additionally, there are multiple trade publications covering some combination of Lightology/Tech Lighting/Gregory Kay in depth, and trade publications that meet the RS guidelines (e.g. have editorial control) are perfectly valid reliable, secondary sources. Thus, notability has been established by indepth coverage both locally and in trade publications. However 3 articles are overkill. The most natural place to cover all 3 subjects in one article is Gregory Kay. Thus, I am suggesting all three be merged together at that title and will volunteer to do so (and clean up promotional language) if the AfD consensus accepts the idea. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:21, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A small handful of trade publication piece plus a single profile in a regional paper does not constitute significant or in-depth coverage. Rather, it is routine coverage. Neutrality^talk 03:43, 19 May 2015 (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.