This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Awards, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
awards and
prizes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AwardsWikipedia:WikiProject AwardsTemplate:WikiProject Awardsawards articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all
list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Wildlife Photographer of the Year is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to
animals and
zoology. For more information, visit the
project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles
"Louise Emerson from the Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition office explained that the judging panel had been "reconvened" and had concluded that it was likely that the wolf featured in the image was an animal model that could be "hired for photographic purposes"."
Note: When considering splitting, please follow the guidance in
Wikipedia:Splitting. Regarding steps 1-4, which revolve around finding a consensus to split: Because there are technical issues, "doing nothing" is not really an option: Either the page must be split, or some other method of reducing template usage must be used. Accepting the removal of the flag icon templates as a permanent change would count as "doing something". If the article is split, attribution must be preserved. One way to do that is to use the templates on
Wikipedia:Template_messages/Splitting#For_use_on_talk_page. 16:25, 31 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
davidwr (
talk •
contribs)
16:25, 31 January 2020 (UTC)reply
If I understand the competition, the use of the flags here is inappropriate per
MOS:FLAG. These artists are not representing their countries in this competition but instead themselves, and they come from or made the pictures in those countries. Please correct me if I am incorrect. (Even in such a case where I am wrong, MOS:FLAG heavily leans toward general deprecation of such decorative use.) --
Izno (
talk)
20:12, 31 January 2020 (UTC)reply
I support the splitting as the full list makes the article way too long. Only: Does it really make sense to have a list of over 3000 winners in different categories of a competition (
Wikipedia:INDISCRIMINATE)? Even more, it is not even clear what the sources for the list are. I would also support a complete deletion of the list. --
Lynxbiru (
talk)
13:44, 1 February 2020 (UTC)reply
Most of them aren't even actual winners. There are 3101 people in
Wildlife Photographer of the Year#The full list. Most are listed as "Highly commended" which is below "Winner", "Runner-up" and sometimes also a "Specially commended" which is listed between Winner and Runner-up. Counting by "Result" column with at least 10 people:
I think it's safe to keep Joint Runner-up and everything above it. If we do this then there is no need to split it out unless we want to keep a page with everyone in the current list in it. I'm not sure keeping those lower-ranking awardees is encyclopedic, especially if the reliable sources we got them from are either stable or are archived at a stable archive site.
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs)
15:58, 4 February 2020 (UTC)reply
That makes sense. I would like to see citations so that I can verify who the winners and runners up are/were. And I think 'Highly Commended's should be removed. I'd also suggest collapsing the table by default if it remains so lengthy.
Nick Moyes (
talk)
00:22, 7 February 2020 (UTC)reply
Here you can find everyone from 2010 to 2019. Years before that are harder, I managed to find citations for a few grand prize winners in newspaper articles. The article claims that the winning entries get published in a book every year, so if one has access to a good library...
By the way, I think most of the other tables like Most images, The longest, The most active, The country list, ect. are dispensable. I would probably keep only the list of overall winners and the (reduced) full list. --
Lynxbiru (
talk)
08:00, 7 February 2020 (UTC)reply