Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Hunter (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. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Hunter (photographer)[edit]

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

Fails WP:CREATIVE/promo page/fails coverage guidelines. The article claims his blog has become an internet phenomenon, but I don't see any real coverage of it. The refs offered are mostly just galleries where Hunter is credited as the photographer with one ref giving him a passing mention as a model's boyfriend. Mbinebri ^{talk ←} 17:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 20:16, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very little notability is asserted; what's asserted is unsourced. "Internet phenomenon" is a convenient weaselterm. This humble comment of mine appears on the internet, and I suppose its appearance is a phenomenon. Of course it's not what some hack working for Variety might gush was a "phenomenon" (or "phenom" or whatever's the latest gushterm). Phenomenology aside, the article states that The blog [...] since been featured in The Los Angeles Times , The New York Times, Nylon Magazine, the LA Weekly and a number of other arts, culture, and fashion publications. Commendably, it gives a link for each of the four rags/mags; however, of the four, a grand total of zero seem to discuss the blog; certainly none "features" it according to any meaning of "feature" with which I'm familiar. -- Hoary (talk) 10:21, 6 November 2009 (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.