Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dick Swanson
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep. Black Kite (talk) 10:27, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- Dick Swanson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
appears not to meet notability criteria. Additionally, this article has 2 people lumped together as one (look at the references), and splitting doesn't solve the notablility issue (also note Ticket:2014091210002996, which concerns me starting this AfD). --Mdann52talk to me! 07:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. — Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 10:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. — Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 10:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. — Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 10:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 10:23, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- First of all I don't have log in to your ticket thing, so I can't verify what is the problem. Second, as I mentioned in my edit summary one of them have over 400 photos for various notable magazines, as the ref suggests. My suggestion would be to live at least one of them. Any thoughts?--Mishae (talk) 18:06, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. This (details) shows that his archive is kept and catalogued by a major university, which I think indicates notability (in the normal sense of the word), and I think that there are enough bits and pieces about him on the web for the creation of an article. (There may be material in books and magazines too.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:43, 14 September 2014 (UTC) .... Elaboration: Keep an article on the Dick Swanson who was born in 1934. (I haven't yet formed an opinion on the 1933–2009 Dick Swanson.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:38, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Comment. I think the main problem is that there are at least two Dick Swanson's that are photographers. The one born in 1934, raised in Illinois with the utexas.edu archive, wife from Vietnam, White House photos, etc.[1] / swansonphotography.com And the one born in 1933 in Michigan, died 2009 in Florida.swanson-media.com One of those (or a third Dick Swanson?) took a bunch of photos for the EPA in the 1970s and some of them ended up on commons, commons:Category:Dick Swanson. I think the utexas.edu one is the more interesting one, but there is very little biographical detail available online to use to make a proper biography. --Dual Freq (talk) 02:08, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Comment. Thank you for bothering to elucidate what I'd been too lazy to look into. ¶ The photographer of commons:Category:Dick Swanson is given a little fingernail [it hardly amounts to a "thumbnail"] sketch here. This work is hard to square with what's written in the CV of Swanson 1933-2009, though not completely incompatible with it. It's easier to square with the potted autobio of the other Swanson. Whoever the photographer was, I'd expect there to have been some correspondence between him and the relevant government agency; unfortunately the U Texas archive doesn't appear to include any correspondence, so we learn nothing here. -- Hoary (talk) 03:38, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Keep, but focus on Dick L. Swanson, photographer (b. 1934) of the U Texas archive and remove swanson-media.com related items. I found a handful of sources Talk:Dick Swanson#Dick Swanson (b.1934) and I think he meets WP:Artist. He seems well known in assignment photography, especially Vietnam related. A Day in the Life of the United States Armed Forces lists him amongst their list of "25 of the best military photographers". And his bio says his work is included in the permanent collection of the Museum of Modern Art.[2] Business Insider also thinks he is the same Dick Swanson of commons:Category:Dick Swanson and it would be nice to have a bio here since there are several dozen DOCUMERICA photos on commons. --Dual Freq (talk) 19:03, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Comment. Business Insider also thinks he is the same Dick Swanson of commons:Category:Dick Swanson. Yes it does, and it may very well be correct. However, I don't find it at all persuasive. (See my comment in the talk page.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:18, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- Comment. Dual Freq subsequently found more, persuasive (if perhaps not citable) evidence for identifying the photographer of Philadelphia with
Swanson 1933-2009Swanson b.1934. (See the article's talk page.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:09, 21 September 2014 (UTC) .... edited Hoary (talk) 23:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC)- Actually, I was saying it is the Dick L. Swanson (b.1934) in Illinois and still living, the current subject of the article. --Dual Freq (talk) 23:36, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- You were indeed. (What an incredibly stupid thing for me to have written. I blame it on jetlag; others may blame it on senility.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, I was saying it is the Dick L. Swanson (b.1934) in Illinois and still living, the current subject of the article. --Dual Freq (talk) 23:36, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 12:43, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 10:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.