# Talk:Emeco 1006

I've been working on some Emeco-related content for Wikipedia that I think is more neutral/less promotional, more comprehensive, better-sourced and contains freely licensed images. The drafts I hammered out are located at User:CorporateM/Emeco 1006 (on the chair) and User:CorporateM/Emeco (on the manufacturer).
There was previously an Emeco company article that was (quite rightfully) deleted by @Y: as an advert (I didn't write that) and I was hoping to prompt a discussion on whether a neutral version should be restored or if information about the company should be consolidated here on the chair article as a sub-section. I believe the articles should be consolidated per WP:ORGVANITY, however my past experiences have been that there is not necessarily strong consensus for WP:ORGVANITY, which is part of an essay I wrote that emphasizes consolidation. You can see what a separate stub article on the Emeco company would look like  here.
I also wanted to ping @Crisco 1492: and @Sandstein: who participated on the page previously and remind anyone that doesn't know that I have a financial connection with Emeco.  CorporateM (Talk) 17:35, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

In my opinion, two articles are justified because the company has received significant coverage for products other than the 1006 chair. I think that CorporateM has done a good job with both drafts.  Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:20, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


### Request edit
Based on @Cullen328:'s comment above, I've added an AFC submission to the draft article on Emeco and am requesting that this draft of this article on the 1006 chair be considered as a much more up-to-date, well-sourced, neutral, illustrated, and comprehensive replacement of the current. A couple minor notes about the draft:

I didn't keep the anecdote in the current article about how the chair easily survived being thrown out of a sixth story window. I can restore it with sources if someone disagrees.
A lot of designer magazine sources cover the chair's "clean lines" and other aesthetic assessments. It didn't seem like something that could be incorporated in an encyclopedic fashion. Just including images I think is a better way to do it.
CorporateM (Talk) 16:02, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Done. I changed "alleged trade-dress infringement" to "alleged trademark infringement", because "trade-dress" wasn't in the source. Also, "cite news|title=Homeward bound|newspaper=Metropolis|last=Weeks|first=Katie|newspaper=Contract|date=July 2004|pages=28" generated a "calling Template:Cite news with more than one value for the 'newspaper' parameter" error. I deleted the "newspaper=Contract", but I don't think "Metropolis" is an actual newspaper name. Could this be the same Katie Weeks who writes at [ http://www.ecobuildingpulse.com/author/katie-weeks ]? --Guy Macon (talk) 15:18, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks @Guy Macon:. The source is actually called Metropolis. I usually give it a fresh look-over for citation errors, etc. and it gets another culling-over in GA reviews, but it's great that you caught them now. I'll take it the GA route now and see if it's long enough. CorporateM (Talk) 17:06, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Looks good to me. I believe that "Metropolis magazine" would be a better choice. That's what they call themselves at [ http://www.metropolismag.com/Contact-Us/ ]. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:26, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 Done Most of them already said Metropolis Magazine, but I caught one that just said Metropolis, which is what I think you were referring to. All set! CorporateM (Talk) 17:34, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Below are a few requested corrections, tweaks and misc items. Suggested additions are in bold and trims in strikeout, etc. to indicate the proposed edits.

Change the first sentence in the lede to "The Emeco 1006 (pronounced ten-oh-six), also known as the Navy or Miami chair, is an aluminum chair manufactured by Emeco"Reason: To get the synonymous names in bold text per MOS:BOLD and WP:BOLDTITLE. (PS as a matter of original research, I'm told it was only called the Miami chair for less than a year and that this name may not be of lede-worthy significance; no strong opinion about whether to keep it or not) Done
"In 2006 Coca-Cola collaboratedbegan a collaboration with Emeco to create a 1006-based chair[9] made out of recycled Coca-Cola bottles,[8] which was released in 2010.Reason: To clarify that 2006 is when they began working on the chair, not the year it was introduced Done
"The remaining 10 percent of the Emeco 111 and the Broom chairs is made up of colorings and molding materials."Reason: The source only says the Broom is 10% moldings and colorings, not the 111. My mistake. Done
"As of 2010, some variants of the 1006 chair use wood, upholstery or fiberglass"Emeco says none of their current products use fiberglass, but I do not have a source to provide more updated information, so figured we could at least date the info. Done (sentence was removed entirely)
Can we call the 111 chair by its full name, the "111 Navy Chair"[1] upon first reference in the Lede and body, to be followed by short-hand references to "the 111"? Currently it's only identified as the 111 without its full name being mentioned anywhere Done
Suggest adding something like "As of 2012, more than one million Emeco 1006 chairs have been produced." to help explain its notability
Since we ended up with separate articles on Emeco the company and the 1006 chair, should some of the non-1006 chairs be on the company page instead? This is a bit complex, because the sources explicitly state that the 111 (for example) is a 1006 replica, but some of the others naturally aren't explicitly identified with a negative of not being 1006-based. The 2006 and the Superlight chairs are not clearly identified as being a 1006 and are included in a source that profiles the company (as oppose to being focused on the 1006) and seemed like potential candidates to move to the company page.
David King, Ethical Wiki (Talk) 23:15, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
References


#### Comments
I like all of the above suggestions, including dropping "Miami chair" as a non-notable advertising gimmick. Does anyone object to any of the above? If not, in a day or two I will make the changes. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:52, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
I agree that info about non 1006 derived/inspired chairs should be moved to the Emeco company page. The design of the Broom chairs for instance does not seem to be based on the 1006.--Sapiens scriptor (talk) 01:12, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks so much!! Does anyone support/oppose adding the number of chairs sold per the second-last bullet? I'll circle back and propose which chairs to move to the company page. David King, Ethical Wiki (Talk) 20:59, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
No objections from me with regards to adding sales figures. Also marking request as answered. Altamel (talk) 19:32, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Sales figures are fine with me. On some pages that sort of thing might be considered marketing fluff, but in cases like this where the fact that the chairs have been very popular for many years is notable, it benefits the reader to see how popular the chairs are. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:40, 11 October 2015 (UTC)


### 1006 versus not 1006
Per the discussion above, the 111 chair is clearly identified as being inspired by the 1006 Navy Chair this article is about, but many of the other chairs are not clearly identified in the sources as to whether they are 1006-inspired or relevant to this article in any other way. I conducted some blatant original research (terrible I know) and asked Emeco which chairs they felt were 1006 inspired and which have nothing to do with the 1006. I then cross-checked their list against the chairs that are notable enough such that they are mentioned here and looked at some photos. The following chairs if you look at the photos I've linked to, they are obviously not relevant to the 1006 chair this article is about and I suggest moving any content about these chairs on this page to the article about the general company at Emeco

Superlight[2]
Broom[3]
20-06[4]
Also, there seemed to be pretty strong consensus to add the following if anyone doesn't mind throwing it in:

As of 2012, more than one million Emeco 1006 chairs have been produced.
David King, Ethical Wiki (Talk) 23:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

 Partly done: I've added the sales figure, along with a ref to an online source (couldn't access the book). I've also removed the mentions to the unrelated chairs, but I'm not sure they should be moved to the main Emeco page. The problem is I'm rather wary about company pages becoming a back-door catalog of products—the Emeco 1006 is distinctive and should certainly be mentioned, but I'm not quite seeing the deep level of coverage for the other products that would make me comfortable with mentioning them on Emeco's page. Sorry: that's the best I can do. Altamel (talk) 20:10, 3 November 2015 (UTC)