Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Australian photojournalists

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 keep. per LISTN, following some work. (non-admin closure) >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 21:23, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Australian photojournalists (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A pointless list that would be better off as a category. Unlikely to pass WP:LISTN as it is a cross-categorisation and is not a group normally discussed in independent sources. Kb.au (talk) 00:24, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Kb.au (talk) 00:25, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Kb.au (talk) 00:25, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Kb.au (talk) 00:25, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Kb.au (talk) 00:25, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:NOTDUP relative to Category:Australian photojournalists. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:28, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete occupations are much better covered by categories than lists. The sum total of people in a nation who are in a profession of this level is never going to be well covered in a list, a category will be much better maintained.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:15, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:NOTDUP. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:29, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- much better served via a category. At present, this is merely a link farm, with no added value whatsoever. It's also unclear why a list is needed anyway, since there's not discussion present of what makes these individuals notable as a grouping. Fails WP:LISTN in the present form. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:35, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep List upgraded, now an encyclopedic list, no longer a "link farm". Aoziwe (talk) 14:32, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per aoziwe JarrahTree 06:03, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. I don't really see what this does that a category wouldn't do. Or, even better, a small tree of them: Category:Photographers in Australia, Category:Photojournalists in Australia. In any case, I've cleaned up the truly horrible formatting. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:33, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.