Talk:The Vulture and the Little Girl

Hoax diary

I re-removed the "diary" quote (and the unreliable wordpress source). The diary said "I pray that He will protect this little boy, guide and deliver him away from his misery. " What little boy? Didn't that ring any alarm bells? You can see Snopes or a number of other hoax finders which all agree with the obvious. Fram (talk) 07:18, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

At a push, we could say Carter was alleged to have said this by [insert reliable sources here] but there is no evidence this was ever written. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Identity of the Child

Hello - it was a boy! It exist reliable sources - more than one. I add this in the future, maybe in November. RL is first at this moment and asking all my time.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 23:42, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

So here is the news source that this blog references to say the child is a boy. Can anyone find any more information?-- M1A1TrackedTerror (talk) 23:17, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, the info I write in November - currently no time to do so.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 08:55, 4 September 2017 (UTC) PS El_Mundo_(Spain) .--Maxim Pouska (talk) 08:59, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

• Comment: The source quoted is not reliable source and is self-published; so no. Verifiability of the claim is dubious. Identity has not yet been established by means of independent and reliable sources. Kindly refrain from adding the content to the article unless a consensus has been reached in this discussion. Thanks, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 11:31, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello @AKS.9955:, first the information was published in the book The Bang-Bang Club, by Greg Marinovich and João Silva back in 2000. Kevin Carter did never speak about a "Girl" in his photo. The changing from a boy to a girl was the job by the editorial staff at the NY Times for the first printing back in 1993.

Beside - how can you call the best investigating newspaper in Spain not a reliable sources? [El_Mundo_(Spain]: El Mundo (Spanish for "The World", full name El Mundo del Siglo Veintiuno, "The World of the 21st Century") is the second largest printed daily newspaper in Spain. The paper is considered one of the country's newspapers of record along with El País and ABC.[1] Or in Wikipedia Spain [11]

But I agree with you that a consensus should be found on the talk page. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 12:46, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

• Questions : The problem is much more complicated and cannot be solved by adding some short information. What about the lemma, what about the incorrect text, what about to fix this all in the other articles? OK time will tell. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 12:31, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

New text: Kevin Carter and Joao Silva in Sudan

Hello @AKS.9955:, the new text is based on the book by Marinovisch and Silva - it is on my desk. Written 1997 to 1999, published 2000. This is the first reliable source. Nobody is perfect and the New York Times is written by people. I used the book and the references are inline-refs. More text is coming later in November or December. I insert soon the following text (correcting then the missing refs and ... and etc. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 10:15, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Joao Silva and Kevin Carter in Sudan

Invitation by UN Operation Lifeline Sudan

March 1993 Robert Hadley, a former photograph and at this time the information officer for the UN Operation Lifeline Sudan, offered Joao Silva and Kevin Carter to come to Sudan and report about the famine in South Sudan. It was a offer to go into southern Sudan with the rebels. Silva did see this as a change to work more as war-photographer in the future. He started the arrangements and secured assignments for the expenses of the travel. Silva told Carter about the offer and Carter was also interested to go. Kevin did see it as an chance to fix some problems „he felt trapped in“. To take photos in Sudan was a task, which an opportunity for a better career as freelancer, and to „get of the white pipe“. „Kevin was on a high, motivated and enthusiastic about the trip“. Marinovich wrote in the book. {sfn|Marinovich|Silva|2000|pp=109-110}} To pay for the travel Carter secured some money from the Associated Press and others, but need to borrow money from Marinovich, for commitments back at home too. Not known to Carter and Silva was all the time that the UN Operation Lifeline Sudan did have "great difficulties in securing funding for Sudan", explains Marinovich. Marinovich wrote further: "The UN hoped to published the famine … Without publicity to show the need, it was difficult for aid organizations to sustain funding". About the politically differences and fighting "João and Kevin knew none of this – they just wanted to get in and shoot pictures".

Waiting in Nairobi

Silva and Carter had prepared carefully for the trip. They flew to Nairobi to get from there to Sudan. The new fighting in Sudan forced them to wait in Nairobi for an unspecified period of time. In between Carter was flying with the UN for one day to Juba in the south Sudan to take photos of a barge, which food aid for the region. But soon the situation changed again. The UN received permission from a rebel group to fly food aid to Ayod in. Also Rob Hadley was flying on a UN light plane in and invited Silva and Carter to fly with him to Ayod.

In Ayod

The next day they arrived with the light plane in the tiny hamlet of Ayod. The cargo plane landed shortly thereafter. The villagers were already waiting next to the runway to get fast enough food wrote Marinovich, and "Mother who hat joined the throng waiting for food left there children on the sandy ground nearby." Silva and Carter separated to shoot pictures of children and people, the living and dead victims of the hunger catastrophe that had arisen through the war. Carter went several times to Silva to tell him about the shocking situation he had just photographed. Witnessing the famine touched his emotions very strongly. Silva was searching for rebel soldiers who could take him to someone in authority. He found some soldiers and Carter jointed him. The soldiers did not speak English, but one was interested in Carter's wristwatch. Carter gave him his cheap wristwatch as a gift. The soldiers were their bodyguards and followed them for their protection.

To stay a week with the rebels they need the permission of a rebel commander. Their plan would take of in an hour and without the permission they had to fly back. Again they separated and Silva went to the clinic complex to ask for the rebel commander. The rebel commander was to find in Kongor, south Sudan he was told. That was for Silva good news, "their little UN plane was heading there next". He left the clinic and went back to the runaway, taking on his way pictures of cildren and people. "Hi came across a child lying on his face in the hot sun – hi took a picture.

References

Prize-winning photograph in Sudan

Sold to The New York Times, the photograph first appeared on 26 March 1993 and was carried in many other newspapers around the world. Hundreds of people contacted the newspaper to ask the fate of the girl. The paper reported that it was not known whether she had managed to reach the feeding centre. In April 1994, the photograph won the Pulitzer Prize for Feature Photography.

It turned out that the girl was a boy, Kong Yong, and he was being taken care of in the UN food aid station. Mr. Yong died in 2008, according to his family.

OK the text is identich to the text in the article about Kevin Carter and Joao Silva - just small edits for this two people. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 10:13, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

References

I insert the new text - information

Hello, the new text I insert now is written completly by myself. The text (by me) is also inserted in the articles about Joao Silva and Kevin Carter. The information and inline refs are from the book by Joao Silva and Greg Marinovich. If you have questions about the text - please - diskus it on the talk page. Thanks and best.PS some editors did take care for the text and formating of the refs, thanks for the help.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 22:04, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

More text and information

Hello, I start again to do some bigger edits today, and put this text here for discussion. After my edits today I start wiht the "Reception": bad/critic, positiv and reception from academic studies - next week.

Today is about: Publication and public reaction, which I working on. The public reaction is described later in the "Reception". Both sides are presented and also an academic study is quoted.

PS the formating of the Refs I do later correcly.

Now the edit I planning:

In March 1993 the New York Times was looking for an image to illustrate a story by Donatella Lorch about the Sudan. Nancy Buirski, picture editor on the foreign desk of The New York Times called Marinovich, how Marinovich wrote. He told her about the picture by Carter with the words: „ an image of a vulture stalking a starving child who hat collapsed in the sand.“ Hi gave her Carters phone number and the picture was published in March 26, 1993 in the New York Times. The text to the Picture read: "A little girl, weakened from hunger, collapsed recently along the trail to a feeding center in Ayod. Nearby, a vulture waited. (Kevin Carter)“.[File:Http://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/26/world/sudan-is-described-as-trying-to-placate-the-west.html?pagewanted=all%7Cthumb]

Why the child was described as a „Girl“ at this time is not known yet. It later turned out that the girl was a boy, Kong Nyong, and he was being taken care of in the UN food aid station.[13] Mr. Nyong died in 2008, according to his family.

The picture touched the nerves of the viewers. The New York Times was contacted by several hundred people to ask if the child had survived. The part of the caption „… along the trail to a feeding center in Ayod.“ was not the real situation, This together led to a misleading interpretation of the child's situation by the critics, how Marinovich and Silva described in her Book. Carter was accused of inhumanity in not helping the child and leaving her vulnerable to attack. But Carter was also defended for to „had shot one of the most controversial photographs in the history of photojournalism“, how in an article by Rare historical photos to read. https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/vulture-little-girl/

References

OK - this is the text I planning to insert. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 10:31, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

• Dear Maxim, you don't need to ask for approval here on the talk page for every piece of text you want to insert. Just add it to the article! If there is something that needs fixing, we will do that, we can read it just as well in the article. If there is something somebody don't agree with, they will let you know here on the talk page. It serves absolutely no purpose at all to first write the text here. You know enough about writing articles to not make any big mistakes, so please just write! :) cart-Talk 21:49, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello OK, I just write.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 02:26, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

That said, I removed two paragraphs in which the grammar was incomprehensible. I gather English is not your first language, so please ask for help here. As well, the way those paragraphs were written, they appear to be WP:SYNTH arguments designed to reflect negatively on the photographer.

Also, Rare Historical Photos is an anonymous blog, which are non-WP:RS and specifically disallowed. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:53, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Tenebrae, yes I am a German and I still asking for help. I know that I need help for Englisch. I start to write more neutral information, with valid references in Decembre and January. Then I asking again for help. The negativ text is old and not my writing. Also the blog Rare Historical Photos was an old link, which I used too. I like the help by the editors at wp:en - thank you and all other very much. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 08:52, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Happy to help when I come back later today when I have more time. In the meantime, what is it that you would like to say? I'm happy to help smooth it out for English. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:23, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Tenebrae, the next weeks RL is priority no.0. In between I work at the contents list. It need a better structure to tell the story completely. For exemple: how was discovered after 18 years that the girl was a boy, this need more information, because all around the internet world it is just a mess on information. The controvers about the job by kevin - to help or to tack pichture - need more infos. His "death and legacy" is better then only to write "Kevin Carter's suicide", and some more. The error by the NY Times need some explaination - not only a citation.

For all this I did an intensiv research and the stuff is now on my computer disc - all this from sources which are WP:V : "Base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources ..." inclusiv inline citation. OK, I do the work on my computer now, and if I ready then I ask for help - but it need more then 8 weeks bevor I ask again. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 22:07, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm here for you. One suggestion: In addition to your own writing, why not put your original German text in Google Translate, and we'll see what comes out in English that way. I can follow most of the above but not quite all. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:46, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi, at this time I write only English text for this article, not in German. It don't exist a original German text. I train my grammar again. That is a mix between German, English and a little French. :-) Please askt me if you have a question. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 16:23, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Let's try this: Put your proposed edit here, on this page. I will clean up the English and then you can tell me if it is saying what you mean to say. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:22, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

OK. The next text will be ready in four to six weeks. --Maxim Pouska (talk) 02:47, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

New Text: "Background"

Hello Tenebrae The next step is editing the section Background only. more editing is following soon.

Background

The Hunger Triangle (Ayod-Kongor-Waat) in South Sudan was 1992-1994 dependent on the help of the UNESCO and other aid organizations to fight the famine in the area. In the report CIVILIAN DEVASTATION, Abuses by All Parties in the War in Southern Sudan Jemera Rone wrote: „The malnutrition rate of children under five was 40 percent by late January, 1993. The situation in Ayod was "critical, with daily arrivals of more displaced in search of food.“ The UN Operation Lifeline Sudan (Southern Sector)(OLS) estimated that in March 1993 everyday in Ayod dying „from ten to thirteen people, mostly older people."

The Operation Lifeline Sudan was interested to receive more publicity in the Western world about the situation in South Sudan. To invite journalists, writer and photographs, the OLS need to ask the Government of Sudan for Visas which included the Work permit to work as journalist. Because of the war situation, the South Sudan was repeatedly closed for journalists. In March 1993 granted the Government again visas for Journalist from Western Countries. The editor Donatella Lorch from the New York Times explained in her article, illustrated with the picture by Kevin Carter, the situation and the problem with the visa. She wrote that the journalists are not permitted to travel freely, but rather to spend the allotted 24 hours under Government supervision.

This for today.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 10:42, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Maxim Pouska! I'll work on this later today or early tomorrow. Pleasure to be working with you. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:21, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

I haven't been on Wikipedia for a few days because of the American holiday of Thanksgiving. Just wanted to stop in briefly and let you know I'm still going to help, hopefully later today, depending on work schedule. Thank you for your patience. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:53, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Here's my attempt at cleaning up the language, formatting, punctuation, etc. I did not check the citations to make sure they support the statements, since this is strictly copy-editing; other editors can delve into that. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:53, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

The Hunger Triangle, a name relief organizations used in the 1990s for the area defined by the South Sudan communities Kongor, Ayod, and Waat, was dependent on UNESCO and other aid organizations to fight famine. Forty percent of the area's children under 5 years old were malnourished as of January 1993, and an estimated 10 to 13 adults died of starvation daily in Ayod alone. To raise awareness of the situation, Operation Lifeline Sudan invited photojournalists and others, previously excluded from entering the country, to report on conditions. In March 1993, the government began granting visas to journalist, with severe restrictions on their travel within the country.

Hello Tenebrae the information „the journalists are not permitted to travel freely, but rather to spend the allotted 24 hours under Government supervision.“ is importend to prove that Carter was never alone with the child. He was always under „superversion“ of soldiers. I have two more citation for this point. I prefer to write this directly at the beginning. Because no normal reader run the effort to read this information via the reference - just normal. I need this information directly at this place. I write about the conflict of ethik and moral latter in a section too. About the debate wrote Fred Cate: „But the photograph also provoked a maelstrom of public, journalistic, and academic debate about Carter’s failure to help the little girl.“

I would write: In March 1993, the government began granting visas to journalist. The editor of the article in The New York times explained: „The journalists are not permitted to travel freely, but rather to spend the allotted 24 hours under Government supervision.“

Hello - now I change the text in Background.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 16:08, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

All good. I made a small copy edit and made it less wordy while saying the same thing. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Death and legacy

I write Death and Legacy in two sections. Because at this time not an info to legacy is on the page about Kevin. The legacy is not only about money. The legacy is today for the teaching of studends from college to master diploms and academice studies around the world. This information just showed up in my research. Citation exist more than fifth. The image is the reason for the use in studies, schools, Universities, and etc.

Kevin Carter's death

Main article: Kevin Carter § Death

On 27 July 1994 Carter died of carbon monoxide poisoning at the age of 33 in his own car. His suicide was the third death of photographers which reported about the the township wars in South Africa. Abdul Shariff and Ken Oosterbroek, his best friend, were shot. Carter wrote about Ken Oosterbroek in his suicide note, "[...] I have gone to join Ken if I am that lucky."

Desmond Tutu, Archbishop Emeritus of Cape Town, South Africa wrote: "And we know a little about the cost of being traumatized that drove some to suicide, that, yes, these people were human beings operating under the most demanding of conditions."

John Carlin,The Independent’s South Africa bureau chief, commented in his Obituary „What torments drove him to undergo a mood-swing so calamitously abrupt is a question best left to his family and close friends to contemplate.“

OK. I'll try and copy edit it as promised within a day or two. Thanks for your continuing hard work! --Tenebrae (talk) 17:43, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

I like hard work :-) and special to do research. Thanks for fixing my text.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 18:04, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

How about:

Main article: Kevin Carter § Death

On 27 July 1994, Carter died of suicide by carbon monoxide poisoning at age 33. Desmond Tutu, Archbishop Emeritus of Cape Town, South Africa, wrote of Carter, "And we know a little about the cost of being traumatized that drove some to suicide, that, yes, these people were human beings operating under the most demanding of conditions."

I removed some WP:SYNTH about the other two photojournalists; it's irrelevant and the suggestion of a conspiracy is speculative. Also, the Carlin quote doesn't say anything other than "We don't know why he committed suicide." The Tutu quote at least offers a perspective.--Tenebrae (talk) 23:25, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

OK - I learn (I like this too) - SYNTH is not useless - I have to rewrite this, that it is ok for SYNTH, because I need this information latter to prove that many of the stuff writen in the internet about this articles - inclusive at Wp - is just wrong. Also the special editorial included 3 or 4 mistakes - which are : Based on the information by Carter the last sentence of the editorial “It is not known whether she reached the center.“ is contradictory to the facts which he told Buirski. - Ref ref book pp 120-121 ref - Kevin told this to the two women, you deleted to. No problem - I contact you via email this week to explain it.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 00:13, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

PS this are mistakes based on a western perspective - not an non-western perspective - for this the citation is coming from Fred Cate

I appreciate your working so hard on this. I having a little trouble following your English — which is fine; I'm sure you're better at it than I would be a your language! — but we need to avoid SYNTH in that we're not allowed to argue a point, which requires taking a point of view (POV). If two reliable sources say two different things, we include both ... like we do when celebrities ages' differ in different sources. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:49, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate your help too. I looked at SYNTH and found "Gray-area cases aren't SYNTH, just unclear writing." [here.] I taking care for the NPOV too. The editorial by the NY Times is the starting point for the "armchair quarterbacks" (citation exist) to attack Kevin Carter for not to help the "Kid", to go to the child, pick it up and carry it to a feeding center. This is one side of the coin - the other side was only discovered 18 years later. The investigation by Spanish journalists revealed the faulty interpretation of the photo. I have to write according to the rules of WP:NPOV and I will try again. I planning to write in deep about the investgation in a new section, because more information and facts were discovered. This facts are importend to be included in the article - to get the story "straigt, how Marinovich and Silva wrote. Beside, I see no reason why the editorial needs a separate section for itself.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 07:37, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

PS I read WP:USEBYOTHERS and the next section WP:RSOPINION. Ok, it exist in the old reliable sources (NY Times as example) from 1994 to 1997, and up to this days, many statements that were later questioned by other sources, and they were refuted, because by new facts. I try to take care of this.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 14:26, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't think this is a grey area. You seem to be saying you want to make an argument to "defend" Carter. That's taking a point of view and not being neutral.

The article already has Carter saying he shooed the vulture away. The article already says the girl recovered and resumed walking. Those are the plain facts. And I would point out that nowhere in the article is there any criticism of Carter. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:27, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

I am sorry – where did I say I would defend Carter? You write "You seem to be saying you want to make an argument to "defend" Carter. That's taking a point of view and not being neutral".

I did write two times in my last posting: I taking care for WP:NPOV.

As I started to work on this story about Carter and also The Vultur and the little girl in January – the articles were at some points biased against Carter – only. It started back in 2005 and from this time on it was published in the WP for now 12 year. Was this Ok ? Spezial the posting of the „Alternativ interbretation of the photo – date 07:27, 27 December 2007 – was something, and no editor was taking care.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 02:10, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

No worries — it's probably just a misunderstanding because of language differences. It was my interpretation of your saying, "The editorial by the NY Times is the starting point for the "armchair quarterbacks" (citation exist) to attack Kevin Carter for not to help the "Kid", to go to the child, pick it up and carry it to a feeding center."

In any event, there's nothing like that in the article, and after having gone through its history, I'm not seeing any "alternative interpretation." I'm not sure where "07:27, 27 December 2007" comes from — this article was not created until September 2016. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:23, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

No problem - I explain this latter - now it is 4.18 am in Germany.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 03:19, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello I have still problems to use the diff link. The articles The vulture and the little girl and about Kevin Carter are connected. I heard about the photo vulture and girl for the first time in January 2017. I used „vulture and girl“ as searchwords at google and found some links – at WP too. I read the article and it looked ok. In the article I found the name Kevin Carter as the photographer. Then I read the article about Kevin and direcly did I know something is not correct. Then I started to read view history and found [interpretation of the photo]. This started my research.

Now it's getting exciting. The first secondary source misinterpreted the photo. Almost all other articles and also studies at universities took over the mistakes - today too. Only in 2011 the new investigation of the Spanish journalists brought new information about the fate of the "myster girl" - which was a boy and on the day of photography no longer in danger of dying of hunger.

The reason that today I plan to write in detail about the fate of the child is: The story is in the education at college and universities a standard topic for photographers on the topic of ethics and morality. This started around 1995 and today every studend and teacher is speaking and writing about it in the study of photography. I just think: Now is the time Wikipedia:EN should be the a place to get it right.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 10:38, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

That makes sense, as long as we present both sides neutrally and without undue weight to either side.

Also, I think we should probably move that Interpretation section from Kevin Carter to this article (bringing it first to the talk page to work on, since it is primarily about the photo and not about Kevin specifically). Does this seems like a good idea?--Tenebrae (talk) 18:23, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Actually, I don't see anything at Kevin Carter about interpreting the photograph. Perhaps that old section was removed for a reason. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Tenebrae - for the old text in the article by Carter try this link direktly please https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kevin_Carter&oldid=180387957 I hope it works. I deleted the text. I take now a short break, clean my desk, so I keep the overall view straight - I hope. PS the interpreting the photo is coming some day, it is a work in progress. It is a good idea to do it first here. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 19:45, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Maxim. Thank you for the link. That old text actually doesn't seem to contradict anything that is documented here, so I'm not sure why the old editor called it an "alternative interpretation." I can see why it was removed long ago.

I think we have a language thing. I'm not sure "interpreting the photo" is translating the way you mean it to. The only interpreting (that is, analysis) of the photo itself would have to come from us quoting photography experts.--Tenebrae (talk) 23:44, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

I know - I don't interpret the photo - I use veriable sourches - only. For examble by Fred Cate (Fred Harrison Cate (born 1963 in McRae, Georgia) is Distinguished Professor and the C. Ben Dutton Professor of Law at Indiana University Maurer School of Law,[1] where he is a senior fellow of the Center for Applied Cybersecurity Research.[2] etc. ). I know that Wikipedia is a WP:WIAE. .--Maxim Pouska (talk) 01:13, 14 December 2017 (UTC) PS see email.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 01:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

.-- Tenebrae (talk) 14:39, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Text for Legacy

The legacy by Kevin Carters is, beside money, that his iconic photography of the "Struggling Girl", is part of the education in journalism at colleges and universities. This started already in the middle of the nineties in the 20th century. The topics are the ethic and moral responsibly for photojournalist in a situation how Carter was in, at the frontline of humanitarian help or war. The question was and is today: "To take the photo or to help first". Teachers and professors in China, Australia, America, etc. using the image by Carter in classes and seminars. The photo is also know as "Struggling Girl" on the Internet. The first Example is a blog from the Duke University WordPress service for students and professors.

• Photo essays from Prof. Vicki Russell’s “Writing Across Cultures” class in China at Duke Kunshan University in fall, 2014. "The students are from a variety of backgrounds – seven from mainland China, three from India, one from Vietnam, and one from the United States – with varying degrees of English language experience. We decided on an informal approach for this blog and have posted the entries as is – all written 'with an accent'". [12] Prof. Vicki Russell’s “Writing Across Cultures“

• Lindsay Maizland studied at the American University, Washington, D.C., B.A. Broadcast Journalism & B.A. International Studies, May 2017: The Lenses of Truth: Photographers’ Moral Responsibility to Document Injustice in Most Situations. The Case of Kevin Carter.

• Janae Easlon is a senior at Western Washington University, studying journalism and international studies. Example: KEVIN CARTER'S TUMULTUOUS YEARS: The United State's response to the work of a South African photojournalist, who made the audience question his ethics.

• Schreyer Scholars are required to complete an undergraduate honors thesis. In her thesis Sara Matulonis is using as references, beside other, inline citations from the Book The Bang-Bang Club (book).

PS citations for "Struggling Girl" following soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxim Pouska (talk • contribs) 19:36, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

OK - now I add my signatur.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 19:51, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

References

How about something like this:

Since the mid-1990s, Carter and this photograph — sometimes informally titled "Struggling Girl" on the Internet — have become part of some colleges and universities' journalism curricula, under topics involving the ethical and moral responsibility for photojournalists in such situations.

--Tenebrae (talk) 20:14, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure the following is usable, since the document shows no university, no class and no date. What is this site that it's from?

• "The Case of Kevin Carter" in Maizland, Lindsay. "The Lenses of Truth: Photographers' Moral Responsibility to Document Injustice in Most Situations". pp. 2–5. Retrieved 16 December 2017.

--Tenebrae (talk) 20:25, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

References

Not real - the official name of the photo was first: "The Struggling Girl", only! The lemma at WP is nice and maybe an invention from the New York Post. :-)

Most colleges and universities around the world using the photo by Carter, beside other photos, today to teach future journalists in all medias about ethic and morale in journalism. My research is showing this. For example, Korea, Pakistan, Philippines, Venezuela, Spain, Netherlands, England and North and South America. Of course first in the national language Spanish, Korean and sometimes also in English - but not always.

Next point [13]| Biographical research.</ref>

This is a biography about a boy, which owns a name and which was interpreted wrongly as a girl. He has also a family, a history, a place, etc. This is a high important point for Academic writing. His biography is closely linked to Kevin Carter's biography. This is also the point that I write my editing’s based on: The central aim of biographical research is producing rich descriptions of persons or "conceptualise structural types of actions" which means to "understand the action logics or how persons and structures are interlinked". And this method can be used to understand an individual’s life within its social context or understand the cultural phenomena. That is the point I using four examples from college to universities, and explain directly some point in the text, written for the understanding of all people. Some normal people don't like to look at references/citation.

Your edits are not a improvement of the article, how I see it. I see it different. All people writing to me look at WP:hi-ho-etc - so I read WP:OVERSIMPLIFY. Because of this - please don't chance my writing style to your style. Best.

ps about your last question infos coming.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 21:36, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

With all due respect, I am not changing your writing style to my style — I am trying to make sense of gobbledygook and extract facts from it into plain encyclopedic English. I understand English is not your first language, so I have offered to help — because what you are writing, without editing, simply cannot be in English-language Wikipedia. Perhaps you should do this in German Wikipedia instead.

If the title of the photo is not "The Vulture and the Little Girl" bur rather "Struggling Girl", then we need to change the title of the article. I will go see what the Pulitzer Committee called it.

Also, the article already mentions that the "girl" was a boy, citing his father, and explains he grew up and died of fever, so that is in there already. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:16, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

The Pulitzer Committe at http://www.pulitzer.org/winners/kevin-carter-free-lance-photographer give no title for the work. I think before anything else, we need to learn where these two titles came from, who gave it those titles, and which is the official title. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:18, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Commentary

Hello Tenebrae – I know you started to write at Wikipedia in 2005. In the old days (2005) the Download speed: 14679 Kbps (kilobits per second) was a standard. But not everywhere - Connection is:: 470 Kbps about 0.5 Mbps (tested with 579 kB), also a standard in 2005. Today you can get 100 MB per second, but not everywhere. You wrote your articles in the past with just the „the plain facts“, I understand well why you did it. But in this case it don‘t matter if the article is 23,327 bytes, 50,327 bytes, or 150,327 bytes big. For example the feature article December 07 about "Habits (Stay High)" is a song recorded by Swedish singer … and 152,466 bytes big. But the photo by Carter is an Iconic photography and the most controvers discussed in the last 50 years and more. If we write just the „plain facts“ the readers would get the feeling today, we can not write a biography. Some of the plain facts are: the kid (girl/boy) was already in the care of the aid helpers, Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF). It received in the morning food bevor Carter and Silva landed, It was siting down on the place were the kids did her „shit“, it was then going (because it was fit to go) to his mother, just 50 meters (+/-), were she was waiting for the food from the cargo plain. That’s some plain facts. Some more plain facts are following. But the reality today is still: the people, looking from a U. S. western perspective believe the kid died, because Carter did not pick up the child and carried it a kilometer to the feeding center. This are the strait facts. Our job today, I think, is to write an article – in the Wikipedia style – for readers in the academic field, teachers and just normal people, that every „grandmother and grandfather“ and student understand full the history of this photo and the two people involved. My in-depth research is the basis for all the citation, links and comments by notable people published in valuable sources. I appreciate if you correct my English or wording: curricula, mid-1990s, etc. But if you write „ part of some colleges and universities'“, then I can not agree. Why? Some – synonym few is not the reality in U. S. The reality is more „always all college and universities ( from coast to coast) … To your question about the link. First you deleted my text to legacy, then you asking what the link is used for. I smiled – the link is a „witness“ / prove for the fact, that : Lindsay Maizland studied at the American University, Washington, D.C., B.A. Broadcast Journalism & B.A. International Studies, May 2017: The Lenses of Truth: Photographers’ Moral Responsibility to Document Injustice in Most Situations. The Case of Kevin Carter.[3 http://studylib.net/doc/18208242/the-lenses-of-truth--photographers--moral-responsibility-to#] Again – I write for Wikipedia, in an style for an encyclopedia, and taking care of all the „Concepts and guidelines“. Any help I receive from you and the other editors I appreciate. Best.

PS Hello, the photo of the „struggling girl“ was published not only in the NY Times. It was send around the world in March 1993, after the exclusive publishing in the NY Times. The official name at this time was „struggling girl“, and under this name it is well know in academic circles and others too. The Pulitzer name was published in April 1994 and is now the official name. Just one reference ( I found more the 12 references) from an academic paper:

http://www.aestheticinvestigations.eu/index.php/journal/article/view/50 By Merlijn Geurts: „The Atrocity of Representing Atrocity - Watching Kevin Carter's 'Struggling Girl'“ Abstract: Taking Kevin Carter's famous photograph of a Sudanese 'Struggling Girl' as an example, this article shows by criticizing the work of photography scholar Ariella Azoulay who argues for an ethic, reparative spectatorship that focuses on the social encounters behind the photograph, … AESTHETIC INVESTIGATIONS Published on behalf of the Dutch Association of Aesthetics - Home > Vol 1, No 1 (2015) > Geurts PS 2 - I did not write this is the official name today – just to get it straight. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 17:29, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Maxim. I'm a little confused — I never said anywhere that the article was too many bytes long. However, it is very commonly known that good writing is not verbose or overly wordy writing.

The article already says the boy survived and lived several more years before dying of fever. So, again, I'm confused: The article does explain that already.

When you say, "The Pulitzer name was published in April 1994 and is now the official name," which name is the Pulitzer name? I found no name at the Pulitzer website. So is the official name different from the common name? --Tenebrae (talk) 23:14, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Tenebrae. I am now on a Christmas holiday - Merry Christmas. I explain this latter. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 06:32, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

This is a fake information:

This is a fake information: "The photographer reports that he did not know what happened to the girl." This is a text to discriminate against Kervin Carter. The information Kevin told the staff at the NY Times at this time is writen in the book by Greg Marinovich und João Silva. I deled this phrase.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 19:30, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

PSthe photograph did know, the kid was already inside the UN Center. It was sitting on the "bathroom" of the village - a open toilet - after he dit his morning shit he went to his parens just some meters away. But the editorial staff in the fine building of the NYT which fine bathroom did not get the infos correct in her heads. Kevin told it correct to the NYT. Just read the book. --Maxim Pouska (talk) 19:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

That's not what's in the official source anyway. I've added the cited quotation. Ibadibam (talk) 20:25, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

The NYT may have misreported what Carter told them, for whatever reason. I'm not sure that Editor's note counts as "the official source". But I agree with you restoring that quote, which is easily verified in that source, unless and until a quote from the book can be provided to contradict it. Even then, the NYT extract might be worth quoting in full. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello - I can only say - the official sources much too often fake :-) - I was 14 days in the wilderness - no internet - I own this book - US + UK first printings. the uneco inviteted Kevin and Silva to take photos in a helpcenter. It was only posible to take the photo in the helpcenter - I comment later again. Best. --Maxim Pouska (talk) 16:11, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello Martinewan - this is an advertising for an editor - the name . It was an editorial - from the NYT - not from a journalist/editor - his name I red never before in this story. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 16:24, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Ah, so it wasn't written by editor Max Frankel. So who did write that piece? I am not a subscriber to the NYT website, so I can't see any author credit(s). Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:34, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello - an editorial of this importance is allwas a team work in newspapers like the NYT , etc. The editor of the artikel, the picture editor, with talked directly with Kevin and some more editors from the top.

There's an article in my archive with the editorial - there's no editor's name for the editorial. I do not find that today. I try later again. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 18:28, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Again - the kid was inside the UN aid area near the airstrip the photographer too. The name of Max Frankel is only in an paper of a conference: THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY (DRAFT) by Fred H. Cate > Frankle: Former New York Times editor Max Frankel has lamented: "USA Today, which proclaims itself a model for the future, normally devotes more space to the United States weather map than to all foreign news. :-) Nothing more by Frankl. Kevin Carter is also part of this draft but not in connection to Frankl. Hello Martinevans123 pleas delet the name or I can do it. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 18:05, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Now deleted. Editorials are usually unsigned. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:16, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

The child was already cared for before Charter and João Silva landed there.

Hello Hamlet residents have been served by the UN aid station for a long time. The child was already cared for before Charter and João Silva landed there. Please, just read the book by Greg Marinovich and Joao Silva. Written in Chapter 10 "Flies and Hungry People". I correct it now. Thanks. Best.

Ps many journalists, teachers and academics have never read the book. They freely interpret the situation and the wrong information in the texts that they copy according to their imagination. These writers were never near the frontline of aid organizations in Africa or anywhere else. Just my two pence.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 06:44, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

I write too quickly - Undid revision

Hello again - I did an Undid revision and wrote - The child was in the local toilet and performing his morning toilet - there are references in Spanish, from journalists from two different well-known Spanish newspapers - the culture was interested in his shit. the information you find in some links on the talk page. sorry :-)

correct: "on" the local toilet and "vulture". The links are not only to be found on the talk page, but also in the references in the article. Best. --Maxim Pouska (talk) 19:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

In Media: House of Leaves

In the book House of Leaves the fictional photographer Will Navidson takes a photograph which description matches this photo to an uncanny degree. The main part of the described image's inclusion is in chapter XIX (19) pages 418-422. To quote a passage on page 420 describing the image: "In the photograph, the vulture sits behind Delial, frame left, slightly out of focus, primary feathers beginning to feel the air as it prepares for flight. Near the centre in crisp focus, squats Delial, bone dangling in her tawny almost inhuman fingers, her lips a crawl of insects, her eyes swollen with sand. Illness and hunger are on her but Death is still a few paces behind, perched on a rocky mound, talons fully extended, black eyes focused on famine's daughter." The image is mentioned a handful of times throughout the book, first mention I can find is page 6, "-though eventually a number of photographers in the news community did recognize the author as none other than Will Navidson, the prize-winning photojournalist who won the Pulitzer for his picture of a dying girl in Sudan" I'm not an editor here nor do I want to be, but I did feel this was an important related topic and I wanted to bring it to attention. 209.159.199.230 (talk) 04:34, 17 March 2024 (UTC)