Talk:Night photography

message: I've just finished reworking the published photographers list, and included some representative works for each photographer.  I've also removed the link to each photographer's personal site - Wikipedia is not a link farm, nor is it an advertisement site.  One photographer I removed who is definitely notable, but I couldn't find any night-specific work by him, was Bill Brandt.  If there is such a work, please add it back in and list that work.  A couple of the photographers who were in the published list, but only appear to sell prints from their personal sites, I've moved to the other night photographers list, in the external links section.  I'm not too sure I like the links on them either, but I'll leave them for now. — Wwagner 15:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: A new non-encyclopaedic article Night photography tips has been created. I believe that it would make more sense to merge relevant parts into this article.
Velela 08:40, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that, although interesting, the new article isn't encyclopedic.  Since it's basically a how-to, it's probably more appropriate to transwiki it over to wikibooks. — Wwagner 13:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggested on Picturetokyo's talk page (the author of the tips article) that the information could be rephrased as issues or difficulties and included in this article. It's not really a book or a large piece of information. --Imroy 16:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with the suggestion to merge.SteveHopson 17:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with new article?

message: It doesn't belong here.  First, as I said in the edit summary when I removed the list, it's just a big pile of promotional links (see links normally to be avoided, number 4), also known as external link spamming.  Almost all of those links are to sites where the photographers in question sell their work.  Wikipedia is neither a soapbox (number 2), nor is it a link repository (number 1), nor a directory. — Wwagner 14:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  Photographers listed here should meet the tests of notability for photographers (WP:Bio), and have a Wiki article.  Otherwise this list becomes a link farm and that is not the purpose of Wikipedia.  SteveHopson 15:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree * 2. Thanks/wangi 16:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Of course. The "Significant published night photographers" section already has a few wikilinks. But before you run off and create a whole bunch of articles for people you want to link to, I should warn you that Wikipedia has rules about notability. Unless the subject is notable, the article is just going to be deleted. --Imroy 20:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of "Additional night photographers" list 

message: If anyone feels we'd benefit from a few more images on the article then I'm willing to upload some from my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/wangi/night - let me know. Thanks/wangi 16:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I think your photos are really good and should be included in article, either as an addition or a replacement for either current photo.  SteveHopson 17:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm off on holiday tomorrow for a few weeks - if you suggest a few from the gallery and post the links here I'll upload them on my return. Thanks/wangi 23:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More images 

message: It seems like this section is proving itself unnecessary.  It keeps expanding, as different people add the night work that they do - every photographer is different, so the list of potential subjects is effectively infinite.  It seems like that whole section could be summed up as "anything, when shot at nighttime."  Moving it to a short one- or two-sentence paragraph up in the lead section would be much more concise, while still containing the information, and it would also get away an infinitely-expanding list. — Wwagner 19:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see what's wrong with it. Admittedly, I was the one that added it. But it has not kept expanding. Taking a brief look at the list, I can only identify two entries that have been added since I started the section, so where's the problem? --Imroy 05:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "Subjects" section 

message: I have redirected low-light photography here, but it seems there are some low-light situations which are not outdoors at night.  I don't know if people wanted to expand or rename this article, or turn the redirect into a separate article, or if there's a better redirect target. -- Beland 15:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a (currently red) link in this article to available light which might be a good place for discussion of low-light work.  Of course, that article doesn't exist yet, so that could be something of a problem. :)  Until that gets created, here is as good a target as any for the redirect. — Wwagner 20:12, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Low-light photography 

message: 100% to merge Long exposure multiple flash photographic technique with night photography, I could provide night photos from my personal portfolio.
radiant guy 08:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I agree 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Media without a source as of 24 June 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:38, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Picture 121.jpg Nominated for Deletion