Talk:Camera Work

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines 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.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Photography: History B‑class High‑importance

	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
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject History of photography.

"Due to continuing financing difficulties..." What this actually means is "95% of subscribers had cancelled their subscriptions"!

Looking at the articles Camera Work and Photo-Secession, and related bits of the Alfred Stieglitz article, it seems to me they all say basically the same thing, large chunks read as copy-paste jobs of one another: I've found myself correcting exactly the same stuff in each article. That's not to say that they are not all needed, but they need to be differentiated from one another and not simply regurgitate the same stuff. Samatarou (talk) 04:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I finally got round to removing the duplicated info (or rather condensing it to a minimal summary of what is said in the other articles). I also augmented the article here and there to inject a bit of balance into what struck me as a rather rose-tinted view (as noted in the quote at the top). Camera Work was a great journal, but it lost its way half way through with Stieglitz becoming disillusioned with photography and his subscribers becoming disillusioned with him. Samatarou (talk) 16:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Ringtoss.jpg

The image Image:Ringtoss.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's up with the tone?

This article reads like a puff piece for the magazine. AesaraB (talk) 22:41, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]