User talk:TheMindsEye/Archive 2

Barbara Rosenthal, MoMA Collection vs Library (the Dadabase)

The MoMA Library contains a special collection called the "Dadabase" that is original works of art in book form. That is the collection Rosenthal is in at MoMA. If you would prefer this is noted in some other form, please give me an example of a better sentence. There are over 20 of her works there. Please respond on my talk page.Originale (talk) 17:55, 15 September 2009 (UTC) I know Barbara's work. "Dadabase" is collection of works in MoMA's collection of Dada (the art movement) works of which she is an important part. "Dada" not "Data" as in information. Artintegrated (talk) 04:09, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

• Then include it in a way that describes the content of the work, not just another vague resume point. TheMindsEye (talk) 13:14, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Gary Mark Smith

I understand your concern as where as conflict of interest is concerned, and as the writer of the Gary Mark Smith article, I clearly think highly of him yet also as a new person on Wikipedia, I really appreciate the guidance!! If you'd like I do have materials and references concerning Smith's strong stance in the current street photography field--with almost a 100 photographs in permanent collection across the United States now! I think it is important to update the article with people who have exsisted past Garry Winogrand, and with Smith being one of the few (maybe only) contemporary street photographers on Wikipedia, I find it very appropriate.. Let me know what you'd like to see! Thanks so much, Sarah Sarahstern (talk) 19:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Help

You wrote on my page about recent vandalism. I'm currently using a different network than i normally use. I will try to sort out the person stealing my IP address, but please do not block me from editiing wikipedia. Besides from this IP address i also edit under the username kiwiboy121. I've been properly editing wikipedia for a long time, so please give me a day to sort out the vandalism of my IP address.64.246.138.38 (talk) 13:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

You see this is also me!!!Kiwiboy121 (talk) 13:07, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

FYI

I found a whole section of collectors of Coffelt's work at NPR archives http://afonline.artistsspace.org/bio.php?aid=6273

There are many more listed there than here. OneMarkus (talk) 00:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC) see his work at Ten Cubed a virtual Gallery with Haydn Shaughnessy Gallery www.galleryica.com I was invited but could not attend last evening but I have read alot about it on google.

For your reading pleasure

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Holmes is getting interesting. Take another look, and if (unlike me) you have any books about American color landscapes, you might take a look in them too.

I don't know about Holmes. He's not mentioned in the index of the Oxford Companion to the Photograph even though Oliver Wendell Holmes and Sherlock Holmes are. Still, I have a very strong gut feeling that there's more to J. Holmes than there is to D. Keith Furon. -- Hoary (talk) 00:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

And if you enjoy photography-unrelated AfDs, I have one for you. -- Hoary (talk) 08:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I would tend to disagree.

"as his site says, "Daniel Colegrove is a talented and versatile photographer," But his site isn't a significant source of info- its really a promo for his wedding photography."

True, this is his commercial site, however he is a well respected photojournalist and the information he provides in brief is unique and pertinent for a myriad of reasons.

One little known fact about Mr. Colegrove is that he made his living from 1980 until about 1995 by covering conflicts all over the globe including The Falklands, Lebanon, Panama, Afghanistan, Rwanda, Uganda and Croatia by (now get this) selling images to other photojournalists and news outlets.

I would encourage you to write his bio here, it would be quite a coup considering that he really has been a maverick in the field of photography in general yet so little known in his own country of origin.

Cordially, Moe Richart

Moyopic (talk) 00:57, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I do think that Mr. Colegrove is notable and should have a Wiki article. My point on the photojournalism page is that it didn't seem appropriate to link to his page from the article. TheMindsEye (talk) 04:20, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Not to start an argument with you here, however did you read the article? Shooting Under Pressure —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moyopic (talk • contribs) 18:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes I've read Mr. Colegrove's post, and I've edited the Photojournalism article many times. Here's the deal: we can't link to every photojournalist's site - see WP:EL for the policies and reasonings behind that point. We can't even link to every PJ who has a blog. We can link to a very few sites that have a great deal of information that would be broadly applicable to readers of a specific article. IMHO, Mr. Colegrove's site fails that test. If you disagree, you are welcome to discuss the question on the article's talk page to see if you can gain a consensus from other editors of that article. TheMindsEye (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I do see your point. I am new to this and knowing a little bit about his background and seeing he had published on this subject brought about my haste. Thank you, Moe Richart Moyopic (talk) 22:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Middle name of Carrie Rodriguez

Hi. You reverted my edit of Carrie Rodriguez based on WP:BLP. I understand omitting her birth date for privacy reasons, as it is not generally given in her bios or media coverage. However, Carrie's middle name, Luz, appears widely on the web in biographies, news stories, reviews, etc. Examples include the following links (all of them distinct): [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. (If you google her full name, you'll find numerous others.) As a matter of fact, I just ran across this link, where her birthday is shown in what appears to be a celebratory and totally innocuous fashion. OK—I'll leave the birthday off, but with Rodriguez's middle name featured widely and prominently in her PR, I see no logical reason to conceal that. Emoll (talk) 21:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• That's fine. TheMindsEye (talk) 22:25, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks. I went ahead and put her birth year back in (without the date), which is specifically condoned under BLP. Emoll (talk) 22:41, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• "Condoned" was a bad choice of words! Permitted, I should have said. Emoll (talk) 22:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Noah Kalina

An editor has nominated Noah Kalina, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noah Kalina and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Stewart Shining

You made some copyedits at Stewart Shining that I have partially reverted as ungrammatical. Let me know if you have a problem with the current page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 04:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Austinites

Hi - the reason the redlink was present was that an IP address entered Jason Fowler rap artist - he'd deleted the content of the existing Jason Fowler page, which referred to a footballer. I removed the bluelink as obviously it made no sense in the Austinites page. Minkythecat (talk) 22:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

HSPVA names

They need to be sourced. Each one needs to have a Wikipedia:Reliable source stating that the person went to HSPVA. According to Wikipedia:BLP we should remove unsourced information about living people.

If you find reliable sources stating that they went to HSPVA you can add them back. :) WhisperToMe (talk) 15:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, the source needs to say that the person attended that school. The reason why I didn't remove the people on the HISD list was because that is a reliable source that I had on hand. I could go back and look for sources for people who I had earlier removed. They can come back IF they have reliable sources. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:17, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:AlfredYaghobzadeh.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AlfredYaghobzadeh.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 22:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

New stuff

Uh, hello?

Incidentally, I recently looked in here and was appalled and depressed. The very, very short list includes one person whose photography is (adequately) discussed in a single paragraph and two articles that I find myself gagging on (as well as one mostly written by me that's about about to be revamped). D'you have anything bubbling away that might be nudged into becoming a "GA"? -- Hoary (talk) 15:05, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Cloudscape photography

I don't understand some of your edits to this article. Why was it necessary to remove the reference to Robert Davies? Why was it necessary to eliminate mention that one of photographers is Greek? -- 16:12, 29 June 2008 MarylandArtLover

• I was trying to simplify the article and to make it make it more supportable by removing references without documentation and links to persons without Wiki articles. TheMindsEye (talk) 02:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Since the book on the Davies photographs is a significant critical and curatorial production by an internationally recognized public institution dedicated to the art and science of photography (the Arquivo Fotográfico Municipal in Lisbon), and since you left the book in the references section, I have restored mention of Davies to the body of the article. MdArtLover (talk) 02:28, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Invite

Hello, I noticed you've made edits to University of Texas at Austin articles and thought you might want to become a member of the UT Austin WikiProject. We've recently revamped the project page and started a drive to improve UT Austin-related articles. We have a lot of articles under our project and would like assistance getting them to featured article status. Hope you'll join us. Hook 'em Horns!

--Eustress (talk) 21:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks, I will. TheMindsEye (talk) 21:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Glen E. Friedman article

This page has been gone over by many people as you can see in the history. The Tone is fine, it's merely presenting the artist/photographer for who he is and what he has done, which is quite a remarkable within the cultures he has worked as well as within photography in general. I think it may be your lack of understanding of who he is and what he has actually done that makes you question the tone. Every complimentary comment has been referenced. This guys work is incredible in its range and quality, he has some beautiful books you should see before making the comment you have. I look forward to you deleting the "sign" you have put up, it's distracting to a great piece that many people have worked on over the years. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.23.72.161 (talk) 15:58, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• I find the tone to be boosterism, not encyclopedic. My point to you is that you removed the tag without making any changes. If you disagree with my opinion, you are welcomed to do one or two things: make changes to the article's tone, and/or discuss your opinion on the article's talk page. TheMindsEye (talk) 20:44, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject University of Texas at Austin Collaboration for August 2008

The current WP:UT collaboration for the period ending August 31, 2008 is: List of University of Texas at Austin alumni Our September 2008 project is TBD. If you would like to nominate an article for a future project or see what articles we've already collaborated on, please visit the Collaboration talk page.

Thanks to all those who helped out with UT Austin-related articles this last month. This month's collaboration needs help with transferring alumni names into the organizational tables in prep for FLC. I look forward to working with you. Hook 'em Horns! --Eustress (talk) 00:58, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Donald Pike

I am improving upon the Donald Pike article. He is noteworthy for a number of reasons, including the fact that he became a Los Angeles Superior Court Judge (family court) without ever having gone to college and also noteworthy because his beginnings were as a migrant worker in a family of nine children, helping to support the family. He dropped out of high school at age 14, was a milkman and a soft drink truck delivery man. He was featured in articles over the years in the Los Angeles Daily Journal, which is the legal newspaper of record in Los Angeles County. I will add citations and improve upon the article.AuthorAuthor (talk) 03:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Patrice Pike

Considering it looked like it was copied from a MySpace page, it wasn't a tough call to make! ;) ... discospinster _talk 03:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Austin

Hello, I figured out what I did wrong. How about this rewording: "Today, the Austin metro area is home to many companies, hi-tech or otherwise, including three Fortune 500 listed corporations." Dabomb87 (talk) 21:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that the list only includes 2 F500 companies for the Austin area - Dell and Whole Foods. Temple Inland is on the list, but is not in the top 500. So if you want 3 companies, the article needs to say "Fortune 1000" TheMindsEye (talk) 21:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I understand now. I thought you had an issue with Dell. I've fixed the sentence to say "Today, the Austin metro area is home to many companies, hi-tech or otherwise, including two Fortune 500 listed corporations." Dabomb87 (talk) 23:47, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

• • Sounds fine to me, thanks. TheMindsEye (talk) 04:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

not always just crystal ballocks

Eye, on this edit of yours: if a photographer definitely (sourcedly) has an unprecedentally large exhibit in the definite future, I think this can be encyclopedic. In exhibition-planning terms, 2009 is pretty soon. (Last night I was talking with a photographer who's worried about the financing for a major exhibition planned for 2011.) Maybe this 2009 exhibition is no big deal (I didn't look), and certainly the burden of proof of planning of any future event must be on the person who contributes the factoid to the article; so I'm not going to revert you, but in your place I might have started by sticking "{{fact}}" on it. -- Hoary (talk) 09:48, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Azzara

The Great Azzara Dispute is (from my PoV) getting nuttier and nuttier. Do inject some sanity into it before its over. -- Hoary (talk) 01:44, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

on Agnes

The Electric Blanket was shown in many areas including Agnes and Birmingham Museum of Art. The reference was used in that it was the ony one available and was from the Atlanta area. Uri Vaknin along with Allen Frame brought the Electric Blanket to Birmingham. Artsojourner (talk) 19:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Agnes also published Birmingham Art Monthly that became Alabama Art monthly what do I do with this? http://www.bhamwiki.com/w/Alabama_Art_Monthly any help is greatly appreciated.

For some reason I thought youtube was a free trade item. Thanks for letting me know man. I appreciate it. Artsojourner (talk) 20:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Couvrette

Some admirer of Couvrette couldn't even wait one week after the AfD finished before removing FACT tags and adding "sources" that don't actually support the assertions that they accompany. Ugh. -- Hoary (talk) 15:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I feared that result - good job holding the editor's feet to the fire. TheMindsEye (talk) 17:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

There's no stopping pal of Couvrette. (Let's call him "PC" for convenience.) I've gone through PC's latest pile of additions but only as they appear in the article -- I haven't yet looked at the "sources", however, and if they are anything like the set previously added I expect that only half will really be sources. ¶ So, Couvrette has photographed a number of notables. The same can be said of many photographers I can think of who have articles in WP, articles than on average are far less energetically (if more scrupulously) added to than this one. But the portraits by the photographers I can think of are collected in books for which individuals and libraries pay money. Or they're discussed in books about photography. Or both. Couvrette seems different, somehow. -- Hoary (talk) 01:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, despite the obvious enthusiasm of the editor for Couvrette, the claims are getting thinner - the claim of his photos appearing on Canadian stamps, for example, has gone away. TheMindsEye (talk) 02:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Photojournalists

Eye, can I ask you to take a look at what I've written here and to comment on it. Agreement welcome, thought-provoking disagreement more welcome! -- Hoary (talk) 00:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

PS not a photojournalist this time, but here's somebody who may interest you. -- Hoary (talk) 02:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Rodney Lough Jr.

I have noticed your edits to the nature photography page and you seem to know about photography.

I have spent time fixing up this complete fluff piece on Rodney Lough Jr.. Do you know anything about this guy? The article seemed just a huge promotional exercise that Lough had put together. Is this guy worthy of a wikipedia entry? Jenafalt (talk) 10:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

did you not listen to the audio? it is indeed supported. 97.115.116.14 (talk) 22:23, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I listened to it and the interviewer is merely repeating the information that Lough gave him. A much better source would be a reference directly from Fuji. Interesting however is the fact that Fuji does not list Lough on their official list of Talent Team Members - why do you think that is? TheMindsEye (talk) 22:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Adding Trunk Archive

Trunk Archive is an image licensing agency. There are many talent agencies and stock photo agencies cited on wikipedia that are in the exact same line of business. Trunk Archive also represents the work of many photographers that are cited on Wikipedia. The external links being added (that have been deleted) on the pages of these photographers are legitimate links, and are not any more an advertisement or a promotional link, than the link to these photographers agencies, online galleries, and portfolios. The link that is attempting to be added is simply another resource to the photographers associations and body of work. Photoagent (talk) 14:57, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

How to I add these links without them being spam? Thanks.Photoagent (talk) 16:13, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

• Have a look at Wikipedia:External links and the section on links to be avoided. I think Trunk Archive fails on several points, including the inability to view the photos without signing up on the service, and the fact that it exists as a commercial venture and does not add value to the articles to which you added the links. If you disagree, I would suggest taking the discussion to the talk pages of the article to which you want to add the links. This would give the other editors a chance to review the links and to comment on your proposal. TheMindsEye (talk) 17:42, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

The link that was provided is a public link, with no login required. Many of the external links provided on these pages require log-ins, but also have a general search and view function, which Trunk does have. I will definitely add this conversation to the “talk” pages on the particular articles I am talking about, but I would disagree that it does not add value. For example: on a photographers wiki page, it may link to their agency that represents them (a place to hire the photographer) and I don’t see the difference between that and Trunk (which is a place to license those photographs). It is an agency that exclusively represents the body of work of these photographers. In addition, there are no prices in view, options to buy, ads, or any other propaganda that would suggest anything except the option to search through the particular photographers image archive. Thanks for your help! Photoagent (talk) 17:57, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

List of Austinites

You said "(rvt BLPunreferenced template - Each article has its own references)" - Look, then that means "List of Austinites" is still unreferenced. You shouldn't have to direct people to other Wikipedia articles to get these sources.

This article needs, on its page, all of the sources. If they are used elsewhere, great. Just take the sources in the other articles and duplicate them here. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• I must also add that some of the entries lead to BLP Unreferenced articles - i.e. Harry Anderson is an unreferenced BLP. And this list is "relying" on an unreferenced BLP? (Yes, IMDB does not count as a source) - Please do not remove the tag until the problem is addressed by adding sources WhisperToMe (talk) 22:13, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• See my response on the talk page in question. TheMindsEye (talk) 03:15, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Zone Zero Magazine

Why do you edit Zoe Zewro Magazine out of Errol Sawyer's article? It's gallery contains 5 of his pictures. Just type in his name.1027E (talk) 20:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

• Have a look at WP:EL - I don't think that link meets the test, moreover, you used this link as a reference although it does not contain the information you were citing. TheMindsEye (talk) 01:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Notability

Hi!

You seem to have restored a notability guideline which I removed as I thought I added enough notability to Peter Watson's biography (namely, ISBN tags for all his books). Would you please care to elaborate as to why you reinstated the tag, and to please tell me how to make sure there is enough notability ? I would really appreciate, because franckly, other than official ISBN tags (as suggested in the wikipedia guidelines), I'm at a loss.

Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.150.248.28 (talk) 11:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject University of Texas at Austin Collaboration for August 2009

The current WP:UT collaboration for the period ending August 31, 2009 is: University of Texas at Austin#History Our September 2009 project is TBD. If you would like to nominate an article for a future project please add a nomination under that month's section or to see what articles we've already collaborated on, please visit the Collaboration talk page.

WP:UT's first priority is getting the flagship article (UT Austin) back to GA status and ultimately, FA status. So lets take this in baby steps and focus on one section at a time, and what better section the the first: history! Any contributions would be appreciated and... Hook 'em Horns! NThomas (talk) 00:53, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Jacob Riis

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the artcile which you can see at Talk:Jacob Riis/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:38, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Mr Eye, you've made some good changes there. However, you've left it:

he met, befriended for life, and called him "the best American I ever knew."

Does that really sound right to you? I have to say that it sounds wrong to me. I suppose I could say

he regarded, drew and painted him the most handsome actor in Hollywood

(though even this sounds arch). However, your sentence to me implies he met him "the best American I ever knew", befriended him for life "the best American I ever knew", and called him "the best American I ever knew" -- and, well, that brings problems both with semantics and with verb valencies.

But maybe it's my English that's screwy. . . . Hoary (talk) 15:36, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

• Good point, I've reedited the sentence for greater clarity. TheMindsEye (talk) 17:36, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello again Mr Minds. As happens so often, I'm pissed off. Or simply pissed if you're of the American persuasion. Though actually I feel somewhat pissed on. Is it just me? -- Hoary (talk) 06:47, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

It turns out that Roosevelt didn't actually quite say about Riis either of the two things he's always said to have said. It was Jacob Riis, whom I am tempted to call the best American I ever knew, and elsewhere an approving quotation of the declaration by some unnamed third party that Riis was the most useful citizen of New York. These are benign examples of the confusions all around Riis, about whom a favorably reviewed new biography has recently appeared. A copy of that is on its way to me; in the meantime, the article may deteriorate further in my sweaty paws. -- Hoary (talk) 08:34, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Discussion page

Hi, you put back the things from my talk page. Does it mean that I should keep those things there? Does the clean ups of talk pages happens sometime? Is it automatic? Franklin.vp  00:57, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

You aren't supposed to remove comments from your talk page, but you can archive the discussions. This way only the new stuff shows and the older discussions are preserved, but not readily displayed. There are also automatic archivers that you can access that will do this for you. TheMindsEye (talk) 04:41, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Um, no. Everybody is entirely free to delete comments from his or her own talk page. (Even IP numbers are.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

conceptual photography

Hi again. Another question. I put that in link the Conceptual Photography page. I don't have many photos of my own that could be called "conceptual photography" and must of what I found online is owned. That guy was referenced in many places and most of his photos fit precisely in this category. The page it self lack of examples and from the explanation it is not very clear what it is. That's why I put that link there. I'll search in commons to see if we have some examples there. But if not don't you thing that we should have at least an external link to some examples? (It doesn't have to be exactly that one, but at least some) Franklin.vp  01:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

• Yes, I removed the link because it went to one person's home page and I felt it violated WP:EL. A link to a more general site discussing the topic would be more appropriate. TheMindsEye (talk) 04:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Turnley

Uh-oh.

I hope I got this right. -- Hoary (talk) 08:27, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

• Wow, that's bizarrely similar to the history of this page: Matthew Rolston. In the case of Turnley, I recommend returning the page to how it was before the COI edits and then reviewing what from those edits should be included. TheMindsEye (talk) 00:03, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd never heard of Rolston. As I read this exquisite portrait, I'm reminded of another titan I'd never heard of. Break like the wind! (Oh, and have you read about the youthful spontaneous emissions?)

But back to Turnley. I'd actually heard of him. Perhaps I should have reverted, but I didn't; and, perhaps mistakenly, I did make the suggestion on the talk page. I'll see what happens during the week. -- Hoary (talk) 00:32, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

"Please state why...." Perhaps because its autobiographical excesses are in the process of disappearing? Yes, it still is an autobio, and yes your edits are good; but I think your edit summaries have been a bit on the truculent side -- especially when bearing in mind that the man (1) seems to have got the message and (2) (unlike plenty of autobiographers hereabouts I could name) actually merits an article for reasons in addition to "has been mentioned a few times by what are defined as 'reliable sources'". -- Hoary (talk) 03:40, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

• OK, point taken. TheMindsEye (talk) 03:45, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

While I'm not entirely happy about this, I think the editor is trying to do the right thing and I'm not at all keen to replace the warning flag. So (not least because I'm busy) I think I'll step back a couple of days and watch any further changes from the same source. (Incidentally, the article has already inspired me to order one of the man's books for "my" library.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:05, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

• I agree, the article is getting better. Too bad that many editors don't see what a disservice they do to an article's subject by larding up articles with lots of fawning praise. Turnley is a great photojournalist and deserves a well-written article about him. This article may finally mature with age.

Image of Photographer Daniel Colegrove

Hello, I saw that you were active on this photographer's page. I have an image of him I took myself on a film set several years ago, however I don't seem to be able to upload it. Have you any suggestions? GGliddy (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Nadar Edit

My apologies, the move has been reverted. KAPet (talk) 16:16, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, no apology necessary - I just think these changes work best when we discuss them first, achieve consensus, and work together. I don't necessarily disagree with your change and I recognize that it was well intended. TheMindsEye (talk) 16:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Coyote page link

Please explain why you consider the Urban Wildness link I placed on the Coyote page to be a spam link? I have been on Wikipedia for a number of years and certainly recognize the need to avoid spamming. The site's photographs, however, are directly relevant to the article -- they have been featured in a number of exhibitions in San Francisco -- and its text addresses several of the central concerns of coyote and general wildlife conservation. The link seems a logical next-step for anyone who, having read the article, becomes interested in going further. Kessler (talk) 14:37, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

• Please read WP:LINKSPAM. You posted a link to your own page that did not add, in my opinion, a significant resource to the article. If you disagree, please discuss it on the article in question. Please also be aware that you have a COI, and your personal opinion may be biased towards the worthiness of your page. Please also note that I found you had posted this same link on a multitude of articles, including Category:Environmental photography, Nature photography, Wildlife photography, Red-tailed Hawk, San Francisco, Hawk, Owl, Habitat destruction, Habitat conservation, Domestication, Ecopsychology, Wildness, Wildlife management, Sustainable urban infrastructure, Urban ecology, and Urban wilderness. Obviously you are very proud of your work, but the judgment of the appropriateness of links to personal websites is best left to other editors. TheMindsEye (talk) 02:21, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

The site I linked is not my own but my wife's. I understand this subjects my judgment to the same bias cautions about personal pages, but my case for her photos rests on the public exhibitions they have enjoyed -- these have been successful and significant -- and on their unique relevance to the particular WP articles to which they were posted. The site's many coyote and other animal photos, and its recordings, are very useful to those who study such things. 

The link was posted only to carefully-selected articles: first 16 on "ecology and wildlife", later 3 on "wildlife photography" -- each evaluated carefully for the particular relevance to it of the site and its materials. That is not spamming: per LINKSPAM there is no "promoting a website or a product" here, and re. COI there is no "advancing outside interests" -- the site is not commercial but entirely informational and aesthetic, a resource and "next step" in research for readers of each article.

The recent External Links rationing is doing Wikipedia a disservice, overdoing it: some articles now have no external links at all, most are left with very few. But WP without its links becomes an island, no longer the introduction and gateway to the Internet which it really must be. The WP spam policy was implemented to prevent spambot activity, commercial advertising, hacker mentalities -- not to isolate WP, cutting off users from going the "next step" in their research -- enabling further research via links is the point, and entire advantage, of the Internet. 

Kessler (talk) 10:25, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

You have a clear conflict of interest here, I would encourage you to discuss the usefulness of your link on the talk pages of the articles before readding the link. If you care to debate WP's policy on EL or COI, WP has forums for that purpose too. TheMindsEye (talk) 14:16, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Roll over photography

Who needs photos of boring old mountains and rocks and stuff? An unlikely source tells me of a work of true artistic genius. Now, where's my checkbook? -- Hoary (talk) 15:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC)