Talk:Bruce Weber (photographer)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bruce Weber (photographer) article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject History of photography, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on the history of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Contents 1 Sexuality 2 did this ever occur to you? 3 Unnecessary page move 4 just a thought re: coach vs photographer

[edit] Sexuality

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.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.158.104.246 (talk • contribs) 07:51, 25 June 2005 (UTC)

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. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.158.113.50 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 6 July 2005 (UTC)

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)

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)

[edit] did this ever occur to you?

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?

[edit] Unnecessary page move

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)

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)

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)

[edit] just a thought re: coach vs photographer

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)

Personally, I didn't know there was a coach called Bruce Weber. Sweetie Petie 12:15, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

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)

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. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.105.104.236 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)