Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Devlin


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:44, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

David Devlin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Having worked with someone notable does not make one notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Subject lacks the multiple, independent third party reliable sources giving non-trivial coverage that is required to have an article here. Some reliable sources mention the person in passing while discussing the main topic, but he has not been the subject of any articles, as discussed on the talk page. DreamGuy (talk) 02:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 22:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 22:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 22:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

His life story also has not been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film.
 * Delete - i have found no significant coverage about  him. There are some interviews with him, but the interviews do not seem to meet the criteria of WP:ARTIST. --  TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  15:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep- Devlin's personal life hasn't been the subject of any major news publication or agency.

Devlin has played a major role in significant and well-known Feature Films and Still Photography Fashion and Advertising Campaigns.

As a result of his depth of knowledge, Devlin has been a contributor to cinematography books, , one of which was reviewed by "American Cinematographer" magazine.

The book review referred to the group of contributors(with Devlin being a member) as being "the best of the best". This demonstrates Devlin is regarded as an important figure or is cited by peers.

Mr. Devlin has given many magazine interviews, most of them are Film Industry related, not a mass market tabloid. listed below are some of the articles Devlin has given.

The topic of magazines articles cover the art of cinematography, D.P. and camera info, the grip's rigs, and Devlin's lighting scheme and choice of fixtures.

Lincoln,

Minority Report,

Catch Me If You Can,

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull,

War Horse.

"Saving Private Ryan"

To further demonstrate that Mr. Devlin is regarded as an important figure and respected by peers. Jim Jannard the owner of RED Digital Cinema hired cinematographer Devlin and director Bill Paxton to create a short film to advertise his new RED EPIC-M The Introduction of the RED EPIC-M is a big deal. Jannard is worth $3b and is financing the development of the EPIC camera to create to most widely used professional digital cinema camera system in the world. In 2012, Jannard launched an advertising campaign with a 8 page fold out in the April-September 2012 edition of Vogue magazine featuring The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo star Rooney Mara, shot on EPIC by director David Fincher and Devlin. In fall 2012, Dolce & Gabbana hired Devlin to light the "Dolce and Gabbana Collection for 2013". It is notable that Devlin is respected in both the Fashion World as well as the Hollywood film world.

Devlin was nominated for Outstanding Cinematography at The International Film Festival of the Art of Cinematography Plus Camerimage).

Lincoln was nominated for Outstanding achievement in cinematography by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. It is the third film Devlin has lit that has been nominated. One (Saving Private Ryan) has won.

Devlin's Lighting Director collaborations with Matt Mahurin,Steven Klein, Craig McDean, Steven Meisel, Annie Liebowitz and Inez van Lamsweerde and Vinoodh Matadin are certainly worth exploring.

There is alot of information out there to make a rather interesting article, based on lighting styles and not on big hollywood fame WP:FAME. I feel that there may be a case of WP:ZEAL to delete what could otherwise be a truly interesting article.

- 69.144.126.122 (talk) 13:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:INHERITED. Being associated with famous projects and people does not make one noteworthy unless one is also the subject of commentary. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  16:36, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * None of the books and magazines reference his working in the entertainment industry as the basis for his inclusion in those publications. All people who work in the entertainment industry are associated with famous projects and people at some level. The topics of the referenced articles that interview him are based on who he is, what he has done, or his knowledge, not who he has worked with. He obviously is a recognized lighting expert. -- 99.98.44.85 (talk) 09:48, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * There are lots of people who are quoted as "experts", but that does not mean they meet the notability requirements. There is no indication that he has done anything that is "new standard" / "breakthrough" / "style/presentation/results that is obviously HIM" / "widely copied". --  TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  12:44, 6 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 02:25, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 21:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)




 * Delete Is/Was mostly a gaffer or lighting technician.  Only listed as a cinematographer for one short.  A gaffer or lighting technician is not a "creative" position, thus not eligible for WP:FILMMAKER.  Lincoln being nominated for best cinematography goes only to the cinematographer, not lighting technician/gaffer. "Nominated for Outstanding Cinematography at The International Film Festival of the Art of Cinematography" was about a five minute short in a "small" film festival, plus he didn't win.  Refs in article are only just a brief mention.  I'm able to find a few interviews, but nothing more.  He doesn't pass the "independent" and "significant detail" provisions of WP:GNG.  Bgwhite (talk) 09:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per Bgwhite. I've heavily edited the article, particularly toward the beginning, but my take from reading about Devlin and the sources was that calling him a cinematographer was a major stretch and that he is essentially a technician who has worked on some major films with some major directors. He has also tried to dabble into more ambitious things but based on sources thus far hasn't achieved sufficient notability to warrant an article.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:23, 9 February 2013 (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.