Talk:Head shot

message: I am going to write an article about the photographic technique but leave the redirect at the top until complete.
The external link added is probably the most informative and concise description of headshots Myraedison 01:07, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: Well...This page reads like a scrape from a commercial site now. It is also only marginally accurate. So should I write it myself? Myraedison 16:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information or sales pitch? 

message: What happen to the video game  "headshot" page? Was it deleted? 198.53.51.186 (talk) 01:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Headshot, it was deleted as the content did not pass various guidelines. If someone wants to write an article about the gaming term they should do so at Headshot (gaming) or similar. The information should not be added to this article which is purely about the photographic technique. I am adding a note to the top of this article to point people in that direction too. Mfield (Oi!) 17:53, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: video game term?

message: I have pared this article down because most of the information is superfluous or incorrect and I have added some simple facts.
Some one still needs to write this up, I am no expert in this particular area of the field however I know one. Myraedison (talk) 03:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why I have edited this article 

message: Some good info here in both. Needs to be merged. Evedev (talk) 01:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge the information Heading with Entertainment industry. 

message: I suggest it be reverted and we start over.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Myraedison (talk • contribs) 02:20, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yep, It's a mess 

message: This page reads like a howto page - see Wikipedia:NOT#HOWTO for why it needs rewriting to provide just an encyclopedic entry of what a headshot is, not how they should be taken etc. I have also tagged it as needing reliable sources. Mfield (talk) 23:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That link has been (correctly) removed again by another editor per policy. See WP:LINKS: it may have a good explanation but that does not overule the fact that it is a commercial site that could benefit from traffic from this article. At any rate, WP is not providing advice and people can google away themselves for it. Mfield (talk) 05:12, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree (I shoot them myself). I haven't got around to re-writing any of it as really it needs starting from scratch with citations and references which it embarrassingly, and against policy, has none of. Mfield (talk) 19:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia is not a howto 

message: I have pared down this article (removed inaccurate, self published and excessive information)
It still needs re-writing. Myraedison (talk) 23:08, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Once Again 

message: The images are good, however, they are all from one studio, which is sort of promotional. however, they are really good examples of various types of shots. i have added another, from a different agency.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:29, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Images