Talk:John T. Daniels

Notable?
I'm not sure John T. Daniels qualifies as being notable enough to have an article about him. When a person is notable only because of one event, the usual thing is to write an article about the event, not the person. —Paul A (talk) 03:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The event is certainly significant and Daniels role is substantial. While it's only one work, its widely considered to be photograph of the century.  A dedicated article seems appropriate.--RadioFan (talk) 04:19, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose merging. An article has been written about the event; actually a couple of articles, counting those on the Wright brothers and the Wright Flyer. But expanding either of those articles to include Daniels' biographical information would not be appropriate, in my opinion. His notability may be debatable, but his unique participation in this famous event is sufficient, I believe, to warrant a separate article. Although the following is an odious comparison, I think it makes the point: would articles exist on J.W. Booth and L.H. Oswald if not for a single famous event in which each was involved? DonFB (talk) 02:56, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

"only photo he ever took in his lifetime"
ow can this be confirmed? The man lived till the late 1940's and pictures increasingly became popular in the 45 years after he took the picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.82.58 (talk) 16:10, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Corrected ambiguous text
One of my recent edits was to correct an ambiguous/misleading text: "first flight by the Wright brothers" is far less significant than "first powered flight ever" (that was by the Wright brothers). Perhaps their is a cleaner way of writing than what I did, but at least there is no more ambiguity. Bdushaw (talk) 18:13, 24 August 2019 (UTC)