Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Keffen

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 delete. I don't understand the idea of merge votes to a non-existent article. It doesn't make any sense to rename David Keffen to List of fashion photographers. Keep votes seem not to argue for keeping this article. Mangojuice^talk 19:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] David Keffen

The page is essentially an ad for wedding photography service, does not meet the Wiki standards for biography, and should be userfied. SteveHopson 18:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. per nom Doc 04:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

• Maybe remove the article from the fashion photography article links rather than delete. David is known in the UK for wedding fashion photography as well as actual wedding photography.

• Merge into fashion photography or possibly into a new article titled something like List of fashion photographers. It is verifiable but insufficient on its own merits as an article. --Ginkgo100 ^{talk · contribs · e@} 18:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps someone might consider starting a links section in the article about wedding photography for the best known of the world's wedding photographers such as: Bambi Cantrell, Yervant, Martin Schembri, David Anthony Williams, Geoff Ascough, Peter Prior, David Keffen, Jo Buissink etc, etc. User: mike_wax [[1]] 13.49 GMT

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 14:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 17:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, do not userfy. Userspace is not for advertising any more than article space is. User:Angr 20:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete or Merge List of fashion photographers sounds like a nice idea to me, however the lack of any notable references states delete clearly to me. LinaMishima 20:53, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, He is known in the UK. Just remove the link from the list of fashion photographers in the Fashion photography article and leave in the list of photographers Photographers.User:Griss 00.50am (BST)
• Comment While my vote stays Delete as placed in the original listing above, I don't understand the Merge votes at all. This is an article on a person, how do you merge that with anything? Doc ♬ talk 01:47, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

• Explanation A person can be considered to be part of a group of people. In this case, photographers of various ilk. Hence you can merge a person's individual page into a list of people page. This allows less notable people to still be mentioned, but not to an unwarrented level (ie, having their own article). LinaMishima 16:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per the above comment. Do not merge. Em-jay-es 05:48, 1 August 2006(UTC)

• Keep. See comment by Griss and anonymous comment Re: David is known in UK. Although not as well known as Bailey and the like, he is relatively well known within the fashion photography business for his work in wedding fashion. I heard him interviewed by the BBC on radio around three years ago and he has featured in one or two documentaries over the last few years that I know of. I'm inclined to agree with Griss that maybe his name should be removed from the Fashion photography article, but left in the general list of well known and less well known Photographers. It would not, in my opinion, be suitable to userfy. This doesn't appear to have been written by the subject who refers to it with indifference in a recent entry within his blog. I might attempt to start an article along the lines suggested by Mike Wax. User: Robin James 11.34 5th August 2006 (GMT)

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.