Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chad Copeland (Photographer)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Thank you for your contribution, but please understand that Wikipedia has policies about what is appropriate and what's not. The policy documents on WP:COI and WP:BIO are good places to start. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Chad Copeland (Photographer)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be non-notable. The current version appears to contain no refs to reliable sources apart from a page on National Georgraphic about its contributors, which is not independent. Gnews throws up a few hits, but only thing which comes close to a reliable source is a Gekwire piece which quotes him a few times, but does not amount to substantial coverage. The article has been created by, who may have a COI. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:43, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions.  Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:48, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions.  Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:50, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU  (T/C) 12:32, 26 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The citations and notability are being corrected today. Please allow time for final draft. Thank you for your consideration. --Brooke Copeland (talk) 15:18, 26 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The page is looking much better and has been listed with numerous citations. Please don't delete it. My goal is to learn more about how to make it better. I'll look for any advice you have in doing so. Thank you for your support on this. I will continue to source citations and notable sources. --Brooke Copeland (talk) 19:19, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Brooke Copeland: I urge you to slow down and read WP:GNG and WP:BIO, which explain how the Wikipedia concept of notability applies to biographical articles.
 * You have clearly done a lot of work adding lots of citations, but I don't see any sign of anything which would help to the GNG requirement of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". So I'm sorry to say that all your work so far doesn't help.
 * Most of the links posted are not to reliable sources, and most of them are merely photo credits. The only refs which come close to significant coverage in reliable sources are the National Geographic links, but they they are publishing his commissioned work rather than writing about him, so they are not independent of the subject.
 * What we need are reliable sources publishing articles about Copeland, not just those which publish his work. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:47, 26 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. I could find nothing in the citations other than brief mentions or acknowledgments. A search turned up no independent WP:RS coverage. I found CC's IMDb entry (non-WP:RS), but can see no evidence of notability in it. Fails WP:BIO; and WP:TOOSOON at best. Narky Blert (talk) 09:42, 30 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.