Wikipedia:WikiProject Photography/History of Photography
 | This task force is believed to be semi-active. Although activity is slower than it once was, anyone is welcome to participate in the project. Remove the
|Semi-active parameter from this template if activity resumes or if this tag was changed in error. If almost no activity occurs in this task force, consider replacing this tag with {{WikiProject status|Inactive}}. |
Scope
[edit]This WikiProject aims at improving articles about the history of photography. "History" includes contemporary history. As in other fields, making photographs for a living does not qualify someone as a subject for Wikipedia.
The emphasis in this Project is on the photographs that result from cameras, darkrooms, printers and other gizmos, not on those gizmos themselves, fascinating though they may be.
Good (or better) articles
[edit]It's not only us who think that these articles are pretty good.
- Beato, Felice FA
- Farsari, Adolfo FA
- Kertész, André FA
- Kikai Hiroh GA
- El Lissitzky FA
- Hans Namuth GA
- Pale Blue Dot GA
- Photography in Denmark GA
- Photography in Sudan GA
- Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima FA
- Pedro II of Brazil FA
- Rossier, Pierre FA
- Thích Quảng Đức FA
- Vishniac, Roman FA
This list is appallingly short. Let's make it longer.
All the articles
[edit]Here's the full list of what should be full lists of articles (or rather their talk pages):
- Featured (which should all be listed above)
- [there's no A-class]
- Good (which should all be listed above)
- B-class
- C-class
- starts
- stubs
- lists
- unassessed
- not for assessment
A large percentage of the "B-class" articles were so identified before the introduction of "C-class" and should really be among the latter.
New articles
[edit]New articles are listed here (also transcluded in our discussion page).
Japanese photographers
[edit]And there's also a list of Japanese photographers.
Featured/Good article candidates
[edit]Short-term to do list
[edit]- Splatter the template on article talk pages. (More about this on the discussion page.)
- Bring up these articles to GA status:
Notability criteria for photographers
[edit]Provisionally, a notable photographer is one who meets one or more of these criteria:
- whose work has appeared in at least one solo exhibition that has been noted in more than a merely local press
- whose work has been turned into one book-length collection, put out by a (non-vanity) commercial publisher or university press
- whose work has been published within books that have received critical attention for their photography
- whose work is included in the permanent collection of a prominent museum or gallery. One way to see if a photographer meets this criterion is to look him or her up in one of the books of photography that are based on museum holdings; note that Taschen publishes a very modestly priced and substantial compendium for each of George Eastman House (Rochester) and Museum Ludwig (Cologne).
- who is significant historically (e.g. the first to photograph this or that)
- who, though a photographer, is better known for other contributions to photography (e.g. Walter Woodbury, principally known as an innovator of photographic equipment and processes)
- who is awarded an article or otherwise dealt with in detail within a well regarded and wide-ranging survey of photography. These include, but are not limited to:
- The Photography Book (Phaidon, 1997)
- The Oxford Companion to the Photograph (Oxford UP, 2005)
- Encyclopedia of Nineteenth-Century Photography (Routledge, 2008)
- Encyclopedia of Twentieth-Century Photography (Routledge, 2006)
- who is included in at least one of the following authoritative online resources. [These sites also provide the most accepted forms (in English) of many photographers' names and often include brief biographical information as well.]
Deletions
[edit]Both articles for deletion and those whose deletion is proposed are listed at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Photography, which you may wish to keep on your watchlist. This is transcluded on our talk page.
Participants
[edit]- Arthistorian1977
- Aloedits
- Octavian history
- Pinkville
- Hoary
- Recury
- Morven
- Leifern
- SteveHopson
- Peter Tyrone
- TheMindsEye
- DustinGC
- Ryan Donahue
- Honza Hubicka
- Christophore
- Rick Drew
- T.J. Proechel
- Jackson B
- Peter T.
- Leener
- The Other Steve Jobs
- Xdamrtalk
- mikaultalk
- Myra Edison
- Camera5
- corvus
- Yamanbaiia
- THEPROMENADER
- Michel Doortmont (talk)
- James McArdle (talk)
- Joe Photon
- Pingu
- LexAxis7
- Samatarou
- Jatayou
- jpgordon∇∆∇∆
- MagazineHound
- Sswonk (talk · contribs)
- GWeaver (talk · contribs)
- Ipigott (talk · contribs)
- LaNaranja (talk · contribs)
- ConcernedPhotographer (talk · contribs)
- Justinc (talk · contribs)
- Dlurner (talk · contribs)
- Bms4880 (talk · contribs)
- Genevieve2 (talk · contribs)
- Jburlinson (talk · contribs)
- Madinpursuit
- Louibu (talk · contribs)
- PatHadley (talk) - Mainly working on Commons tidying Museum collections and improving metadata.
- N0TABENE (talk · contribs)
- CharlotteM85 (talk · contribs) - Primarily interested in non-male photographers
- Curiocurio (talk · contribs) - British Columbia / Canadian photographers
- Barbicanf (talk · contribs)
- David Tornheim (talk · contribs)
- Eothan (talk · contribs) - Australia, Pacific, and nineteenth centrury photography
- Fayiscider
- Thecuriouscurator
- JeddBham64
- HanochP
Please feel free to add {{User HOP}} to your user page to indicate your membership in this project. Your visitors will then be dazzled and delighted by:
.svg) | This user participates in the WikiProject History of Photography. |
Resources
[edit]- /Resources is where you go for resources.
- This lists prominent Japanese photographers
Related and potentially confusable WikiProjects
[edit]- WikiProject Photography, with an emphasis on doing photography for use within articles
- WikiProject Visual arts
- WikiProject Journalism
- WikiProject Media
(RIP WikiProject Cameras [cf Camerapedia] and WikiProject Digital Cameras.)
Article grading
[edit]Please help us grade articles as well as improve them. We're using the 1.0 assessment system, perhaps with minor changes as yet to be worked out on our talk page.
(For the time being, we're not aiming to label any article as "Class A": such articles are normally drawn from non-Featured articles already recognized as "Good", and we have only a tiny number of these.)
The method by which you attach the grade is explained below, under "Template". Look among articles that haven't been tagged with our template, and also among those already tagged but not yet assessed.
(Some pages need not and perhaps should not be graded; you'll find examples here.)
Featured and Good articles
[edit]A "Featured Article" ("FA") or "Good Article" (GA) will already be so marked in its talk page and also listed here (FA) or here (GA); if you happen to notice a relevant FA or GA that we haven't, do please tag it accordingly.
Those already tagged are listed here (FA) and here (GA).
B, C, Start and Stub Class articles
[edit]Tag any B class article as B unless you were its primary editor; tag any C, Start or Stub class article as C, Start or Stub. If you were the primary editor of what you think is a B class article, tag it without grading it.
Those already tagged are listed here (B class), here (C class), here (start class), and here (stubs).
(Note also the photography, photographer, and American photographer stub categories, created independently of this project.)
Upgrades
[edit]Upgrade any stub to "Start" or "Start" to "C" if you think the higher grade is deserved. Upgrade any "C" to "B" if (i) you think "B" is deserved and (ii) you're not the article's main author.
If you think an article of which you're the main author is "B" class despite having been graded more harshly, first try to contact whoever it was that previously graded the article, and persuade him/her. If this isn't possible, you can bring the matter up on our talk page.
Downgrades
[edit]If you think an FA doesn't deserve the rating, bring the matter up at FA review; for a GA, see GA review. Also, please mention it on our talk page.
If you think an article rated B, C or Start doesn't deserve the rating, bring the matter up on the article's own talk page. Also, look in the history of that talk page to find who applied the rating, and invite that person to the article's talk page.
Better, improve the article so that it does deserve the rating.
