Jump to content

Talk:Bruce Weber (photographer)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sexuality

[edit]

This really is not good, what on earth does his sexuality have to do with him as a fashion/art photographer? Everyone in fashion is gay (not everyone but enough where it need not be mentioned over and over and over again). And to exploit the odd video and one or two older films and forget about the fact that he, Richard Avedon and Herb Ritts did most Vogue, GQ etc. covers throughout the 80s and 90s and dominated the look of modern fashion...this needs to be the focus. With the death of Herb Ritts, Scavullo, and Richard Avedons old age and certain retirement he is the last of the 70s, 80s and 90s Haute Photographers that is alive and working (he is the end of this era of 100,000 dollar an hour photographers). His contribution to the Pirelli calendar (a testament to the best of the best)...the fact that he is amongst the highest selling photographers with posters and 10,000 dollar prints out...how everyone from Versace to Gucci and back again used him for major (HUGE) ad campaigns...why forget all that?...not very good at all! (And what on earth do ancient Greeks have to do with modern fashion/art photography...officially it has only just been recognized as a traditional art form...Greeks, 2000 years old the way it is described...photography, 100 or so years...makes no sense in this context.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.158.104.246 (talk • contribs) 07:51, 25 June 2005

there is bias on the gay aspect and not the photographer as it should be. though a minor celebrity he is famous for his work and place in fashion and art history. not his sex. i agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.158.113.50 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 6 July 2005
All that matters is whether the material is factual. It would be impossible to overstate the impact that Weber's sexuality has had on every aspect of his work. What right do people have to remove facts merely because they find them inconvenient or (to them) irrelevant? The important information about the sexuality of gay people is disappearing (vigorously removed by self-evident and usually anonymous homophobes) from article after article on Wikipedia, which will lose its value as it loses its objectivity. --Kstern999 18:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bottom line they don't have the right to remove facts. If they can be shown to be facts they should be restored or reverted back. That the reason to keep articles on your watch list. Doc ♬ talk 19:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bruce isn't gay. He has lived with Nan Bush since the early 70s. So in fact he is married by common law marriage.--Jsderwin (talk) 18:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

did this ever occur to you?

[edit]

that he would want to be known as he truly was and lived his life the way he wanted? that the gay community would want to claim him as their own?

I'm not really sure what the point of this is. To begin with he's not gay, if that is the point you are driving at. Secondly, you should put some effort behind your statement by signing your work and adding a date. Like this --> --Jsderwin (talk) 07:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary page move

[edit]

There was no need for the page move with only two persons by this name. The photographer has the largest number of pages directed so it makes sense at this point to at least redirect to that page which still has the pointer to the coaches page. Too many changes of link have been made to make it worth my time. If someone else wants to move it the photographer back and change all the links that's fine. Doc 02:40, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As long as Bruce Weber redirects to Bruce Weber (photographer) then there's no need to change links from [[Bruce Weber]] to [[Bruce Weber (photographer)|Bruce Weber]]. See Wikipedia:Redirect#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken. - Sweetie Petie 09:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are now three people. I redirected to the intended articles. Two of the people have a high level of fame within their discipline so this is justified. FancyPants 19:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

just a thought re: coach vs photographer

[edit]

I'm pretty new to working with Wikipedia (only worked on the Bruce Weber (coach) article), but I think that either: a) Bruce Weber should be redirected to the coach's page with a link to the photographer's page, as the coach is probably more well-known. Maybe that's just my bias, though... I could definitely be wrong. OR b) The pic with the naked guys should come down from Weber's photographer page, 'cause people looking for the coach get sent to this page first, and you don't really want your eight-year-old kid to view it. I don't want to censor the article or anything though, so I dunno. ChrisRunner7 05:59, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I didn't know there was a coach called Bruce Weber. Sweetie Petie 12:15, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia - I do think that it is your bias on being widely known as the photographer is known internationally. One indication of this is the number of articles that link to the photographer (at least three times as many as the coach not to mention a more diverse base of articles) and the most likely new link to Bruce Webber would be for the photographer. I'm of mixed view on the photograph as it is representative of strong part of his life while I am sensistive to your concerns. Also, If you would in the future 'sign' your talk page posts using three tildes (~) or using four will add a datestamp too. Doc 12:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the original poster. Bruce Weber (coach) should be the main page. The coach probably is more well-known among your average American, and I don't think the international fame of the other outstrips that. The "diverse base of articles" stems ONLY from the fact that the photographer doubles as an academic subject, a homosexual icon, and something that is "trendy." All three of those areas provide a wealth of websites, but are in fact cliquish and few in number by nature, as opposed to sports, which has an enormous following and not as many websites. I think the best course of action is to have a disamb. link before going to either page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.105.104.236 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 22 July 2006
I had never heard of the coach until this article and don't know anyone that has heard of him. Doc 03:51, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
One other thought, Wikipedia is not for the "average American" its scope is international, so that must be the basis of decision. Doc 03:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm British and have only heard of Bruce Weber the photographer. But it's fine as it is, isn't it? -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it's not, I thought the disambiguation page was at Bruce Weber. That's where it should be, not a redirect to this article. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Really there is no need for a disambiguation page, there should just have been a note at the top of the Bruce Weber page for the coach, but a new user set it up and this was the consensus rather than an administrator move the photographer's page back to Bruce Weber. Doc ♬ talk 19:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bruce Weber the photographer should be the main page for 'Bruce Weber.' His influence on modern fashion photography arguably has no peers. Not to mention he's launched the careers of such people as Brooke Sheilds and Kate Moss, just to name a few. I am sure the coach Bruce Weber will be a footnote in college basketball history.

"I agree with the original poster. Bruce Weber (coach) should be the main page. The coach probably is more well-known among your average American, and I don't think the international fame of the other outstrips that. The "diverse base of articles" stems ONLY from the fact that the photographer doubles as an academic subject, a homosexual icon, and something that is "trendy." All three of those areas provide a wealth of websites, but are in fact cliquish and few in number by nature, as opposed to sports, which has an enormous following and not as many websites. I think the best course of action is to have a disamb. link before going to either page." —Preceding unsigned comment added by [index.php?title=User:129.105.104.236&action=edit&redlink=1 129.105.104.236] ([index.php?title=User_talk:129.105.104.236&action=edit&redlink=1 talk] • contribs) 14:47, 22 July 2006

Wikipedia doesn't create geo-targeted articles as far as I know. Perhaps you should make an article about what the average American knows, then come back with some information to support your claim. --Jsderwin (talk) 07:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some fixes

[edit]

I added some information at the beginning, since Weber was pretty famous in the art world as early as 1977 and maybe before then, as one of the principal photographers on GQ magazine. He worked in Interview in the mid 1980s. I did a little cleanup on the huge run-on sentence about the calvin klein ad. I'm not sure if the author meant to say that Weber or Schenkenberg was "catapulted into fame" by the wet jeans photos. DonPMitchell 04:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


LGBTProject

[edit]

I removed links to this because Bruce Weber is not gay, therefore there is no reason for him to be linked. --Jsderwin (talk) 07:14, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HE IS gay — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:191:5FA0:4C50:38DB:A3A:BA14 (talk) 16:55, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abercrombie & Fitch Co.

[edit]

I removed the Abercrombie & Fitch Co. company link at the bottom because Bruce doesn't work for them. He's a freelance photographer who is hired by companies to photograph for them. He has a clothing line distributed by them, but that hardly makes him an employee. It's like saying Martha Stewart works for K-Mart. --Jsderwin (talk) 07:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is a good move to remove the Abercrombie link. Can you also remove that title 'box' thing at the top... the 'Abercrombie People' thing?? He worked for Abercrombie for a while but he's not ONLY an Abercrombie empolyee etc. His work began long before his run with that company. Thanks!! TB 204.179.219.251 (talk) 18:56, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The image File:Lodger cover.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --19:08, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Peter Maneos

[edit]

Removed link to Peter Maneos biography. If anything Maneos should link to the Weber article, not the other way around. --Jsderwin (talk) 02:17, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bruce Weber (photographer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:40, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bruce Weber (photographer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:25, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

gay

[edit]

he is gay

he has said it in interview for Pet shop boys DVD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.91.33.110 (talk) 16:48, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bruce_Weber_(photographer)&oldid=1209761776"