Jump to content

Talk:David Steen (photographer)

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

Full Protection for 3 Days

[edit]

I've fully protected the article for 3 days due to the battle over sourcing, before we get into a full blown 3RR edit war. This shouldn't be seen as an endorsement of the current or any version on my part. Parties need to discuss the topic here on the talk page. Address each other, as I won't be participating. Any admin is free to modify this protection as they see fit without permission, although a note afterwards would be appreciated. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 18:08, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]

Stop deleting referenced material. If the page says that David Steen took a pic and on his site there is a pic of that person, of course it proves he took the pic or he would get sued. Talk sense.--Shylock's Boy (talk) 10:14, 7 June 2012 (UTC) How on earth is it defamatory? If three people or indeed 300 people do something stupid, it doesn't make it not stupid! It is NOT defamatory or indeed unsourced. Of course it is sourced - he has the pics on his site!!!!!!!!--Shylock's Boy (talk) 17:35, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. Please stop calling me stupid here and in the article's history. Again, the photographer's website is not reliable nor independent. I could put up a website of photos and say I shot them. Please only add reliable and independent references per WP:SOURCE. Bgwhite (talk) 17:42, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you could put up a site of photos and say you shot them but why would you unless you were an idiot (which, of course, you are not)? Why would you put up a site with hundreds of example of your photos for sale and videos recalling anecdotes of what happened at the shoot unless you had shot them? No personal sites are independent but hundreds of articles on here are sourced by them. And I am not sure how I am edit warring when my work gets changed. The other idiots (obviously not you) are the ones who are edit warring. --Shylock's Boy (talk) 17:54, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please stop calling me and others stupid and idiots. People lie all the time. Yahoo's CEO just resigned for lying about his education. I'm not saying Steen is lying, just there needs to be reliable references. Your work gets changed for not having references. You are edit warring by adding material that is not referenced. Please read WP:SOURCE and just stop. Bgwhite (talk) 18:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have no comment as to the content, but I would strongly advise Shylocksboy to remain civil. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 18:32, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


The "references" that was added to his book is not INDEPENDENT as it was written by Steen.. The book is a self-published reference. From WP:SELFPUBLISH, "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer." Bgwhite (talk) 20:31, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As the article was reverted yet again with the comments that it was not a self-published reference. You are to discuss first without changing anything. I believe the author of the book is Steen. It is a book Steen did and therefore a self-publish sourced. See WP:SELFPUBLISH. Also, the Amazon links to other books that you say contain Steen material say absolutely nothing about Steen. If Steen had done any photos in them, please add a reliable, independent source that confirms that Steen actually did something in the books. Bgwhite (talk) 18:21, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The issue in my mind is what is the point in including a list of everyone he has taken a picture of? It is just namedropping. Sure he took pictures of famous people, what of it? Are the pictures particularly notable? Probably not. Why should they be included? Compare it to an author, would we list every chapter of a book they wrote in his biography? No we wouldn't, but we would list the book. The other issue I have is the early life, which is completely inappropriate in tone for an encyclopedia. --kelapstick(bainuu) 01:45, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I asked at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Using your own photo book as a source. The book is out for mentioning that Steen shot the photos and other sections should be toned down. I propose the last version by Drmies be the one to use as it wasn't edited by any involed parties. Bgwhite (talk) 05:58, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on David Steen (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) 12:33, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:David_Steen_(photographer)&oldid=1198584498"