Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ray Grey

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. Mackensen (talk) 21:41, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ray Grey

Ray Grey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article lacks any reliable sources. IMDb is not a reliable source. I tried to find something with a google source. Just searching "Ray Gray" gave me nothing. My search for where I added film just gave me lots of hits on 50 shades of Gray. I found him going through Category:American Latter Day Saints, so I looked for Ray Gray and added Mormon. I came up with another Gray who spoke at the Mormon Transhumanist association meeting, who lacks the first name Ray, but nothing on Ray Grey. There may be sources, but I could not find any, definately nothing to show Grey is notable. John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:05, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 16:17, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 16:17, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, → Call me Razr Nation 11:07, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resting Places:The Burial Sites of More Than 14,000 Famous Persons, 3d ed. by Scott Wilson, McFarland Publishing: https://books.google.com/books?id=7-DgDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA299&lpg=PA299&dq=%22Ray+Grey%22,+director&source=bl&ots=6USCKExp1L&sig=Y2Sf9PFRljdGhetic53QYQ4Jdac&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjl6M6bvd3QAhUIe7wKHc91A8EQ6AEIQjAI#v=onepage&q=%22Ray%20Grey%22%2C%20director&f=false
The Silent Films of Harry Langdon (1923-1928), By James L. Neibaur, Scarecrow Press: https://books.google.com/books?id=Q5ZoznpiOZoC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=Ray+Grey,+director&source=bl&ots=LDVXhzAwbR&sig=NV0wStgLphRUtmSFSeR98SiXeDA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwji5J6Eqd3QAhXCrlQKHT-xAbAQ6AEISDAH#v=onepage&q=Ray%20Grey%2C%20director&f=false Zootsuit1941 (talk) 21:05, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Just tried my luck at adding the two above references to the Ray Grey page. Zootsuit1941 (talk) 01:47, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note #2: Also just added external link to Hal Roach presents "Between Meals" mentioned above in my original "Keep" vote. Zootsuit1941 (talk) 02:00, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note #3: Added Mack Sennett's Fun Factory: A History and Filmography of His Studio and His Keystone and Mack Sennett Comedies reference for Ray Grey as an assistant director. Zootsuit1941 (talk) 18:07, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note #4: Added "Catalog of Copyright Entries" by Library of Congress reference — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zootsuit1941 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as I concur we have nothing here for genuinely convincing substance for an article and the article and career both show it; improvements are not conceivably helpful if not actually causing an improved article (which seems to be the case here). SwisterTwister talk 19:23, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This is a general comment on this AfD by User:Johnpacklambert and the Delete vote above by User:SwisterTwister. But in the spirit of full disclosure I have to say I am a newbie author, have posted one article that is currently in another AfD nominated by SwisterTwister. With that out of the way, here are my comments.
(1) As a result of going through the AfD process on my first article, I’ve become interested in the whole subject of biographically AfDs. There seem to be hundreds, if not thousands, out there with a hundred or more being added each day. I’ve read through a lot of them and a high percentage seem to have been created without much thought put into them. This particular AfD is a classic example in my opinion. The nominators opening statement is “The article lacks any reliable sources.” The nominator went on to state that he tried to find something with a Google source but came up with nothing. That is only because the nominator spelled the subject’s name incorrectly (as I mentioned in my above Keep vote), as there are a lot of reliable sources referencing the subject, I have mentioned a few (5 so far) that I found in just a very short time.
(2) As far as the above SwisterTwister Delete vote, I see nothing in the explanation to support the Delete vote. Based on the article as it currently is, it seems obvious that Ray Grey accomplished a lot in his 35 years on this planet. I’m not in the movie business but I am a fan of the movies and love the history of the movie industry. Ray Grey is well known to fans and historians of the movie industry and I agree with SwisterTwister that there is room for improvement in this article. My only attempt so far has been to help keep this article from being deleted due to the AfD nominators' main objection of “The article lacks any reliable sources.” I’ve added 5 reliable sources so far as of this writing, and can no doubt add more if necessary (although I don’t think it is necessary). For example, Ray Grey was also a screenwriter (not mentioned in the article) and I know of several references that address this aspect of his career (and I may add them later, time permitting). Zootsuit1941 (talk) 21:57, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnpacklambert: John, which sources do you feel are not "actually reliable" and why you feel they are not reliable; let me know and I will try and correct the problem.
By "directory listings" I assume you mean sources that refer to Grey as a director? If so, I agree with you that the sources I added are for Grey as a director, those were the ones that popped up first, since his main contributions were as a director. There are reliable sources available for his acting and his screen writing also. I just now added one for his acting. I'm sure there is a better way to add that reference, but I'm not skilled at this Wikipedia coding (since the page numbers are different for this one source). Feel free to fix that if there is a fix. If by "directory listing" you mean something that lists only basic facts (like a dictionary), then all I can say is that one of the Wikipedia Notability requirements for an Entertainer is "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" and that's what the sources I've added support. Zootsuit1941 (talk) 02:00, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, what I mean by "directory listings" is that in one of the sources the various films are written about in short directory style with placement of the name of the director (in some cases Grey was asitant director) and such. That is what I am talking about. In another we get a one sentance mention of Grey among 3 asitant directors temporarily advanced to director status by the producer. This is not substantial coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:51, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnpacklambert: Okay, I now understand your use of the term "directory listings." But your AfD was initially based on "The article lacks any reliable sources. IMDb is not a reliable source." I've now added 6 "reliable" sources, and in my humble opinion they all show Grey was notable. Are you now changing your logic for the AfD? My understanding is that "the subject has received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." I think the 6 sources do meet this requirement, of course I may be wrong, I often am. Zootsuit1941 (talk)
  • Delete. Insufficient coverage by reliable independent sources to satisfy WP:GNG. Not that the article lacks reliable sources - his roles in various movies are cited, but the sources, even taken together, constitute only trivial mentions of the subject. There is not a single source that I could find that covers Ray Grey in depth, which is what is required to demonstrate notability. No longer a penguin (talk) 14:37, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on above Delete: @No longer a penguin: The logic for your Delete vote ("a source that covers in depth is required for notability,") seems more opinion than factual; as (1) WP:GNG does not state that depth is required for notability (the only place in WP:GNG that I can find the word depth is "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected."" and (2) WP:BASIC states "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability;" And the mentions in these sources are certainly not trivial. See WP:GNG for an example (i.e., Bill Clinton) of what trivial means. The sources in this article all refer to the subject's career body of work, not trivial stuff like someone being in a high school band. Zootsuit1941 (talk) 23:02, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Zootsuit1941: You are absolutely right that the above is my opinion, it was not intended to sound like authority. However, I still maintain that, in my opinion, in depth coverage in a single source can not be replaced by barely trivial mentions in multiple sources. The should either be an in-depth source or a combination of sources that collectively constitute something "in-depth". And, absolutely, every single source in the article is a trivial mention, I'm not sure how you can claim otherwise: those are books about a different subject, where Ray Grey is mentioned in passing once or twice or as part of credits. The example of a trivial mention in GNG is just an extreme example, different mentions in passing can be trivial. Just like "book-length history" is not the only thing that constitutes significant coverage. No longer a penguin (talk) 08:44, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@No longer a penguin: Comment to above: Unfortunately much of the information on the people that made silent movies is forgotten today, documentation in those days was not what it is today. But the more I look for information on Ray Grey, the more I find.
For example, in the book (not referenced in the article) "American Silent Horror, Science Fiction and Fantasy Feature Films, 1913-1929” by John T. Soister (available online), Ray Grey was mentioned many times over two pages (705 & 706). For example in reviewing the movie “The Ghost in the Garett,” the author wrote “…Ray Grey…was the picture’s primo heavy…” and “Ray Grey …started in the industry with Mac Sennett-the San Diegan’s first screen credit was 1916’s A Movie Star for Keystone -and ended with Hal Roach (Hired and Fired, 1926); this last credit was posthumous, as Grey died in 1925, a victimof the Los Angeles pneumonia outbreak. He was 35 years old. Grey was father to Virginia Grey…and the popular character actress may well be regarded as her father’s genre legacy.” Admittedly this is pretty much the same info as in the Wikipedia article, maybe this is even the original source for the article, I don’t know. But it’s definitely more than trivial mention
In a newpaper article “The Sunday Oregonian. (Portland, Ore.) August 13, 1922,” (also not referenced in the article, but available online) silent era actress Constance Talmadge (one of the most popular comedic actresses in Hollywood) stated “Ray Grey, heretofore assistant director to Dick Jones, Mack Sennett’s production manager, has surprised everyone on the big comedy lot with his knowledge of the art of making up and his portrayals as one of the leading characters in the new Ben Turpin comedy special, “The Shriek of Araby.” I don’t know if you consider this trivial mention or not, I don’t. I'm guessing there were probably many other old newspaper articles on Ray Grey, but unfortunately most are probably not available online.
Whoops, I just now noticed you withdrew your Delete vote, so never mind on all the above stuff, & I see you found one of the additional references that I did this morning. Good work.Zootsuit1941 (talk) 18:56, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You might be right, the sources show that he had named roles in multiple (2, if we only include full-length) films, but I did not consider them as "important" by default. However, they both have Wikipedia articles and seem to have some sources behind them to establish notability. Including this, which claims that Grey and Dorothy Gish were the only "names" in the movie. WP:NACTOR seems to be marginally satisfied, I'll withdraw the delete vote. No longer a penguin (talk) 08:44, 13 December 2016 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ray_Grey&oldid=1138284349"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ray Grey, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.