Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marius Bar


 * 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. We have one "keep" which disagrees with the concept of notability, and must therefore be discounted, since notability as a standard for inclusion enjoys broad community-wide consensus. Apart from that, nobody is convinced that we have enough sources for an article. If more are found, the article can conceivably be recreated.  Sandstein  08:41, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Marius Bar

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Cannot find significant coverage in any source. frwiki article, from which this appears to have been translated, is based on mariusbar-photo.com and ROUTINE bibliographical listings. buidhe 05:50, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nice photographs, but we need more in the way of notability to keep this page.  -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 06:29, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. What do we gain by deleting this? Notability as a criterion makes sense in a world of dead tree storage of information, but not for Wikipedia. I fully support deleting material that is fraudulent or irreparably incorrect, but material that is correct should stay. No one is delighted to find articles about Paris on Wikipedia, but they are delighted to find articles, even if brief, on obscure topics. Furthermore, there is a coterie of WP editors who work on battleships and the like, and nine of his photos already appear (with attribution) in articles, some substantial, on the ships. Thus the article on the photographer creates a link or interconnection between these vessels. Lastly, to return to the issue of notability, sometimes notability resides in a collection of articles, not in each article taken in isolation. In a pointilist painting no one dot has any great significance, but together, the dots create a picture. Put another way: chop down enough trees and pretty soon you have a clear-cut hillside. Acad Ronin (talk) 12:27, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Undecided. As one of those battleship guys, Bar is a hugely important maritime photographer, but I question if the amount of coverage in secondary sources is adequate to meet our general notability standards.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:11, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 08:53, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 08:53, 2 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete since the keep argument is not that the subject is notable but that we should scap notability guidelines. Those of us who have seen what Wikipedia becomes when we loosly apply notability guidelines will not go down that path.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:14, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I am trying to find sources in French, from the period when he was active. I wonder if his photos are held in museums - and I note that some volumes of his photos were published, so there may be reviews of the books. I have found an article in Warship International that says "The name Marius Bar always has been a special one in the world of naval photography", and goes on to talk about a catalogue being published in 1986. I suspect that there is coverage, but it may not be easily findable online. I'll add what I can find. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:47, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment So far, I've found quite a bit in a 1996 issue of Neptunia, though it's only viewable as snippets - what is visible includes the beginning of a description of his practice - "Marius Bar missed no ship launch, whether it was at the Mourillon arsenal or at Forges et chantiers de la Méditerranée ..." A book D-Day Ships describes him as "the well known naval photographer" . Letters sent by a naval officer to his wife from 1912-1919, published in 2008, include instructions to go to "the famous Marius Bar", and that they would "go together to the illustrious photographer" when he was next in Toulon  - which indicates that he was well known as a photographer of people, as well as of ships. A book about Jean Aicard starts to describe Bar as a "Var pioneer of photography", but is again only a snippet view . I'll keep looking - everything I've found indicates that he was notable, though I think access to French resources, perhaps offline, or searchable newspapers, might be necessary to find coverage. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:30, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think that stating that someone is well known is equivalent to significant coverage. If you can find enough coverage to make GNG, though, I may consider withdrawing the nomination. buidhe 12:43, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * No, I am saying that those descriptions suggest that coverage did exist. I have no access to offline French sources, nor, as far as I can tell, to searchable digitised French newspapers. I mentioned the possibility of book reviews and museum holdings as it is possible that we may find evidence that he meets a WP:SNG, even if we can't find evidence of meeting WP:GNG. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:48, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Have you checked Gallica?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:31, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.