Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Bennett (U.K. 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. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  15:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Chris Bennett (U.K. photographer)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

A little puff piece about a photographer. "In his capacity as an official photographer with the Red Arrows RAF aerobatic team, Bennett is one of a handful of civilians entrusted to fly within their formation on a regular basis": an impressive-sounding claim which actually means that, as one of their handful of regular photographers, Bennett is one of their handful of regular photographers. No evidence is given even for this, but Amazon does indeed list a single, out-of-print book about this global warming team that's credited to a Chris Bennett. There follows a list of brands for which Bennett has "produced photography" (which may or may not mean "photographed"). For which we are given no evidence. Our man "has also been the subject of biographical articles within respected specialist journals" but alas the former go unspecified. (The latter improbably include Practical Photography, a decent hobbyist rag but hardly a "specialist journal".) &para; Googling turns up a number of Chris Bennetts who photograph for a living (Wikipedia already has at least one more of these), and this Chris could be among them; since many of the ghits are merely promotional (and/or obscured by Flash flummery) it's hard to be certain of which is which and what's authoritative. I can't confidently say that there is no Chris Bennett, Youkay photographer, who merits an article; but this article doesn't clearly point to any discussion of his work; it doesn't mention a single award, or exhibition; and it has sported an  ""  tag for over half a year to no effect. Enough. -- Hoary (talk) 00:47, 23 November 2008 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions.   —Hoary (talk) 00:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   —Hoary (talk) 00:54, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - He appears in a single book in a Google book search, but the raw number of Chris Bennetts that are not him are astounding. No opinion until further information is found, but I'm leaning toward delete. D ARTH P ANDA duel 05:00, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Tropical  Cyclone  01:53, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete -- does not meet WP:BIO. Message from XENUcomplaints? leave me a message!  03:04, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, the fact that, as the nom points out, we cannot with any confidence say very much about this person, or what he has done, is a gigantic red flag that he fails WP:N. Lankiveil (speak to me) 06:55, 28 November 2008 (UTC).
 * Delete: No sources and no notability. Chicken Wing (talk) 11:04, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per no significant coverage in reliable sources that would otherwise meet the GNG. MuZemike  ( talk ) 17:07, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. SOunds promotional. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 18:44, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I have added external links to the article which clearly show who this man is. He is a pro photographer who is also the Red Arrows photographer as is clearly stated in this nom:- "In his capacity as an official photographer with the Red Arrows RAF aerobatic team, Bennett is one of a handful of civilians entrusted to fly within their formation on a regular basis". I would suggest that he is not one of a handful of photographers, he is one of a handful of civilians who would include other roles. He is in short a photographer and author. Paste Talk 23:07, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You've added three links, including a link to the amazon.co.uk page for each of two books credited to Bennett. Amazon.co.uk is merely one of many retailers so there should be no links to their pages; still, I'm sure you had good intentions and it will be easy for you to cut the links and replace them with a books section that has ISBN numbers that readers may choose to use as springboards to a library, a retailers' database (such as abebooks.com), or a particular retailer (such as amazon.co.uk). As for the third link, what does it tell us that can be worked into the article? (I quote the relevant part in full: The unique aspects of the book can be characterised in two ways. Firstly is the insightfulness, humanity and sheer quality of Chris Bennett's photography. Chris has many interests, and has photographed many subjects, but in this book he has managed to capture something difficult to describe and incredibly rare, the spirit of the Team, and by that I mean the whole Team, air and ground crew, and in that the pride of belonging. Incidentally, note that we still lack any independent confirmation of the claims for all those brand names.) &para; Above, I don't see how you can say the assertion that he's an official photographer with the Red Arrows RAF aerobatic team clearly states that he's the Red Arrows photographer (my emphases). -- Hoary (talk) 00:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 'Thanks for your comment, I'll note the point about Amazon etc. I've added a couple of links on being 'official photographer' but my research has pointed to the fact that this article is in fact a direct copyvio of and so should be speedy deleted? Paste Talk 08:36, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That page is a copy of the Wikipedia article - see the note at the bottom of the screen. Iain99Balderdash and piffle 08:45, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment So it is is my apologies for not being more observant! Paste Talk 09:00, 29 November 2008 (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.