Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wedding photography


 * 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 of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 18:45, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Wedding photography
This seems to be a vanity page, and an advertisement, not encyclopedic. It seems to me the topic could be a section in Photography. Drn8 20:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. &mdash;Crypticbot (operator) 15:31, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but Cleanup/rewrite. Photography is certainly a big enough topic to get multiple articles, and wedding photography is is very different in many ways from, say, fine art photography or stock photography or photojournalism. The current article needs wikification and a good NPOV scrubbing... possibly even a total rewrite. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  16:37, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep/rewrite as per above. Bjelleklang -  talk 16:53, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. I am sure an interesting article could be written about this topic. This however is not it. Capitalistroadster 18:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but rewrite extensively. -- MisterHand 18:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and I also agree with the rewrite. It's an interesting and viable topic, with historical and cultural implications (not to mention professional associations and unique techniques specific to the genre).Shelleyp 18:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep, rewrite and expand. It's the subject of dozens (hundreds?) of books and columns, the focus of careers, an important consideration for enormous numbers of couples getting married, and a major cultural force. I added a bit, and surely other contributors will improve on it. Fg2 02:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Photography is a huge subject so it can't be covered in one article. Golfcam 03:27, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep in its curren state. Samw 03:44, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and thank Samw for the cleanup job. (ESkog)(Talk) 07:02, 22 December 2005 (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.