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 Revert to disambiguation page. Randykitty (talk) 17:42, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Still photography[edit]

Still photography (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)

This page is redundant with Photography and offers no useful additional information, so should be deleted per WP:REDUNDANTFORK. Qono (talk) 17:37, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:39, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Qono (talk) 17:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Qono (talk) 17:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Qono (talk) 17:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Qono (talk) 17:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete (changed to Disambiguate), though I chucked around the idea of a redirect, yet couldn't quite determine if it should be towards Unit still photographer which links from the article, or perhaps Film still as that is also a theme, yet essentially as the nominator mentions, a still photo is simply just a Photograph. It could redirect there, but then I suspect noone searching for information on a photograph would look at this article name initially. The page views are not that low, though I suspect from looking at a few linked articles that those links may be better placed elsewhere. This was a DAB for a period of time though I can't see a reason to retain. Most search engine hits reference Still life photography, which is an entirely different matter. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate per Spinningspark, I noted in my previous comment this was previously a DAB, and it seems that there is not consenus to keep the current article state, or to redirect anywhere, but restoring the DAB page I believe would suit all scenerios. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Photography, of which it is a long-established and once widely-used synonym. I'm astonished to hear talk of deletion here. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:39, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, a redirect is essentially deleting though, as you're still not retaining any of the content or the article itself (not that there is anything worth keeping). Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect I wasn't clear in my nomination. By "delete", I meant blank-and-redirect to Photography. Qono (talk) 20:14, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Qono: If you meant a redirect, then you could just do it and withdraw the AfD. As I noted, I thought also about suggesting a redirect but I thought at this time it would be quite pointless, but you could have done that yourself? Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've struck your bolded redirect. The convention at AfD is to take your nomination statement as a delete recommendation unless you say otherwise. If you then put a bolded recommendation in the discussion as well, it appears you have !voted twice. If you feel the need for a bolded recommendation, you should do it in your nomination statement. SpinningSpark 17:08, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment This could be a disambiguation page. A user who searches for "Still photography" may be thinking of either still life photography or unit still photography, which redirects to unit still photographer. It is rather unlikely that they simply meant to look for photography, so that's not a good target. Vexations (talk) 21:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge - Still photography is in fact a term one encounters with frequency in the art and art history worlds of lens-based image-making. It is not the same as still-life photography, and is distinct from other lens-based processes such as video and filmmaking. It also seems to be more aligned with "old skool" darkroom photo rather than digital photo (or pinhole photography), but that is just a peculiarity of vernacular usage. IMO the article in question should be merged with photography, perhaps in a section that defines various terms. Netherzone (talk) 22:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Revert to being a disambiguation page, which is how it was originally created. Any of the three links on the page are potentially what a reader may have been looking for: photography, the product of a unit still photographer, or still life photography. SpinningSpark 22:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• @Bungle, Chiswick Chap, Vexations, and Netherzone: I have reverted the nom's self-close. Pinging in case the close caused anyone to unwatch the page. SpinningSpark 09:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I self-closed after hearing here that an AfD was inappropriate for a redirect and that I should simply boldly apply the redirect, which there seemed to be a rough consensus for here. I'm still not clear if AfD's are generally the right way to get consensus for a redirect instead of a true deletion, but I'm happy to have the discussion here lead the way. Qono (talk) 14:26, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Qono: Don't worry about it - perhaps my suggestion should have been more around the idea of withdrawing prior to any meaningful responses, rather than after a varied amount of responses. Regardless, it's reasonable that varied suggestions should be considered towards the final decision and letting the AfD run the course allows for a consensus to be reached which may differ from your original view. I don't think there would have been any grumbles from a redirect instead of the AfD, but at least this way others can offer views. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:45, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Revert to being a disambiguation page; this revision looks good. XOR'easter (talk) 17:52, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate because it is another name for Photography; is similar to Unit still photographer; and possibly but less likely is confused with Still life photography. -Lopifalko (talk) 05:57, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Photography. Lubbad85 (☎) 21:45, 29 April 2019 (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.