Deletion of Robert McFarlane (photographer)

Comment: All references provided above combine to show that McFarlane has received significant coverage in independent reliable sources and so passes the |general notability guideline
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Being part of the collections of a number of museums and the National Library satisfies . Multiple appearances in museum collections indicate national importance and are usually indicators of notability in the visual arts (I'd almost say this would indicate automatic notability, but I suppose there are always exceptions). His "Received Moment" concept, which is independently sourced, is also a key indicator of notability. The blog is an extension of a publication and therefore passes . There are enough references, particularly written by Newton and Robinson to satisfy 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE||WP:RS||WP:GNG)

Comment: Once again, a substantive biography is hauled to AfD for annihilation by this nominator rather than engaging in preliminary tagging for sourcing. , please. I've wasted more than an hour on another bogus nomination, so I'll just offer one tidbit out of the 86,000 Google hits for "Robert McFarlane" + "photographer"... http://www.manly.nsw.gov.au/IgnitionSuite/uploads/docs/Media%20Release%20-%20Robert%20McFarlane.pdf SUBSTANTIVE BIO ON NEW SOUTH WALES GOVERNMENT WEBSITE, www.manly.nsw.gov.au/ Now comes the wailing about using Google to estimate the probability that sources exist and/or denigration of the comments of one who disagrees with the nomination
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)