Talk:Jack Mitchell (photographer)

Primary sources

Note the tag was requesting "references that appear in reliable third-party publications". The majority of the sources cited are primary sources which are usually insufficient for a BLP. The only ones that would be considered reliable third-party sources are the NY Times and Smithsonian ones. -- œ^™ 07:44, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

The article also cites: Amazon.com, the Delaware Art Museum and the Atlantic Center for the Arts, each of which are reliable, and notable, third-party sources. X4n6 (talk) 23:23, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Amazon and IMDB are not RSs. This article does still rely on too many affiliated sources. Even one of the NY Times articles was an op-ed he wrote. I'm going to add back the tag. Novaseminary (talk) 03:41, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Instead of tagging the entire BLP, you need to tag the sections you claim are poorly sourced. The BLP is about a celebrity photographer and contains several examples of his work that have already been verified by OTRS. So I have no idea what you could possibly think needs more sourcing. So either you can remove the tag and tag sections, or I will remove it myself. Or I could simply give you a 3RR for restoring it after I already removed it. But I'll let you play the games. For now. X4n6 (talk) 05:39, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

The overwhelming majority of the references in this article are the photographers own website or writings. That can lead to POV problems, etc. All the tag means is that the article could use more independent sources. It is not a personal attack on the photographers character or worth as a human being (or even WP notbaility). It has nothing to do with the photographs or OTRS. It is not really a section-by-section type of tag (like unsourced tags). And I am pretty sure the sources are out there. Rather than arguing over the tag, why not just go add some good third-party secondary sources? Novaseminary (talk) 05:47, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

The reliable sources in this BLP include the New York Times, the Smithsonian Institution, People Magazine, the Atlantic Center for the Arts and Highberger Media, do they not? Which of them do you claim is not "independent?" Which are not "good third-party secondary sources"? Tell you what: you're absolutely right! With a BLP of this calibre, I'm sure there are an avalanche of additional sources we could pull. But you haven't established why or where they're necessary. So why don't you go first? Remove the tag and add a source or two yourself. Just as good faith. Then I'll do the same. Frankly, it would be good to see you actually add edits for a change. We could actually... (gasp!) collaborate. But until then, I'm just not inclined to chase any more balls for you. Sure you understand. X4n6 (talk) 06:14, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, as noted, there are some independent sources. That is great. But the overwhelming majority of the facts in the article are referenced to materials the subject has written or controls. And citing some to his own website is fine. But the proportions should probably be about switched. See numnber 5 WP:ABOUTSELF. It isn't that big of a deal, but as usual, feel free to have teh last word. Just leave the tag until at least some other eds agree with you (or you or I fix it!). Novaseminary (talk) 06:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

So once again, no good faith self-removal of the tag? No willingness to collaborate with another editor - to add edits that would resolve the very concerns you raised? No willingness to fix the problem? Duly noted. There's nothing more I need to say here either. X4n6 (talk) 06:49, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Novaseminary WP:HOUND Warning

Fancy meeting you here, Novaseminary. You were just ani'd for disruptive editing like this in December. Do not stalk me or my edits again or we will go down that road again with a likely very different result. X4n6 (talk) 04:33, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Jack Mitchell (photographer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05029/449569.stm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://atlanticcenterforthearts.org/geninfo/calofevents/icon&idols.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.billjayonphotography.com/Jack%2520Mitchell.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.billjayonphotography.com/Jack%2520Mitchell.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101121163433/http://delart.org/exhibitions/icons_n_idols.html to http://www.delart.org/exhibitions/icons_n_idols.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120310203503/http://museums.richmond.edu/exhibitions/museum-of-art/icons-jack-mitchell.html to http://museums.richmond.edu/exhibitions/museum-of-art/icons-jack-mitchell.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://atlanticcenterforthearts.org/geninfo/calofevents/icon&idols.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jack Mitchell (photographer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://atlanticcenterforthearts.org/geninfo/calofevents/icon%26idols.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://atlanticcenterforthearts.org/geninfo/calofevents/icon%26idols.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141022185438/http://www.atlanticcenterforthearts.org/jack-mitchell-celebration-life-and-legacy to http://www.atlanticcenterforthearts.org/jack-mitchell-celebration-life-and-legacy

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:46, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20100613190030/http://asmp.org/articles/making-splash-asmp-central-florida-life-members.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:03, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: some references have been left as hidden text in the reference section in case they might be useful in the reconstruction of the article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:05, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

• You tagged and subsequently removed an entire article, ostensibly, because of one source. See additional here. Now no article even exists. Per WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM, you broke it - so you need to fix it. X4n6 (talk) 08:04, 21 May 2017 (UTC)