Talk:Judith Baragwanath

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Judith Baragwanath images removed from this page

I propose reinstating the images removed from this page. The fashion photographer Max Thomson has kindly released his copyright for images for this page. This is a rare gift to Wikipedia and its users. With respect, I feel removing his images from this page doesn’t send a helpful message to other professional fashion photographers who wish to contribute. These were incredible vintage images of enormous interest in their own right: they added much to this page - (the clothes! The 70s motorbike!) - including a sense of the eras nascent fashion photographic style encapsulated by this model’s work. Many Wikipedia pages have more than three images, including biographies. To compare this to a profile of another model ignores the other aspects of this person’s life which tells us much about Auckland in the 70s - 80s, illustrated in these remarkable photographs. (Fashion muse, socialite, face of her era). Tahatai (talk) 20:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't. You need to read Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images#Pertinence_and_encyclopedic_nature. Having seven images on the article is primarily decorative, and most certainly distracting. The article is about a woman, not a photographer's work, not about Auckland in the 70s-80s, and certainly it does not exist to "send a helpful message to other professional fashion photographers who wish to contribute." Moriori (talk) 00:01, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Images debate

Thanks for the link. I am perfectly satisfied that these images are “significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative.” (For the reasons I have already mentioned.) They are certainly “an important illustrative aid to understanding.” These images are not smartphone or pap shots. (Unlike so many portraits on Wikipedia). They are an aid to understanding this woman and her place in the 60s and 70s fashion era. They are of the very highest quality: which only enhance Wikipedia’s role as an actually useful resource. I am a MSM designer. I would use these images gratefully. If I checked the Rachel Hunter page (or the others you mention) I would sigh and go back to getty images.

These pages all have more than three images - none as interesting or as high quality as the ones you have removed (by the way). David Gandy (British model) Calvin Harris (Scottish DJ) Javi Martinez (footballer) Ki Sung-Yueng (football player)

Tahatai (talk) 00:33, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tahatai. I think it best to get a second opinion from an experienced editor. Consequently, I have asked User:Gadfium to have a look. See here. If he says I was wrong to trim seven images down to three, I will revert my removal. Cheers. Moriori (talk) 01:30, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is inappropriate to have so many images directly in the article, but I have added a link to the category on Wikimedia Commons. Three images seem about right, but as a compromise I suggest Tahatai could add back a fourth. As fashion is not at all my area of expertise, I have no opinion on which images are best to display.-gadfium 02:38, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. I said I would revert, but suggest Tahatai choose the one to be restored. Tks Gadfium. Cheers Tahatai. Moriori (talk) 03:08, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Images debate

Thanks. I will restore one of the images as you suggest. Tahatai (talk) 01:16, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]