###Instruction: Multi-class classification, answer with one of the labels:['no_consensus', 'delete', 'keep', 'comment', 'merge', 'redirect'] : ###Input:  Q65658519: Sandro Halank (Q65658519) : German photographer, Wikimedian, and political and communication scientist : ( delete | history | links | entity usage | logs ) Pure self-promotion
-- 2003:DA:1709:D939:718D:DD49:B539:EDA 10:13, 31 March 2021 (UTC) But that's just promoting yourself. He only uses Wikidata to profile himself and that is exactly what Wikidata is not for, right? -- 2003:DA:1710:9C1A:5965:8DB4:7DE7:1B41 21:52, 5 June 2021 (UTC) I think it's good to identify and document creators of images in general. We might be content with having them as strings instead of links, but if we already have links, changing them into strings seems counter-productive. whym ( talk ) 12:47, 6 June 2021 (UTC) But that's just promoting yourself. He only uses Wikidata to profile himself and that is exactly what Wikidata is not for, right? -- 2003:DA:1710:9C1A:5965:8DB4:7DE7:1B41 21:52, 5 June 2021 (UTC) I think it's good to identify and document creators of images in general. We might be content with having them as strings instead of links, but if we already have links, changing them into strings seems counter-productive. whym ( talk ) 12:47, 6 June 2021 (UTC) But that's just promoting yourself. He only uses Wikidata to profile himself and that is exactly what Wikidata is not for, right? -- 2003:DA:1710:9C1A:5965:8DB4:7DE7:1B41 21:52, 5 June 2021 (UTC) I think it's good to identify and document creators of images in general. We might be content with having them as strings instead of links, but if we already have links, changing them into strings seems counter-productive. whym ( talk ) 12:47, 6 June 2021 (UTC) I see both the point of Whym and the point of E4024 not that way. With regard to the statement by Whym I would like to make two points. First: If it is so easy to get a structural use, then I can be happy about a lot of journalists so that you can identify that the journalist Max Mustermann wrote the newspaper articles with which you can prove data in the data object and in the data object can prove. Is that really the point of structural use? Second: If you do it that way, you put Wikimedia Commons photographers above photographers who do not upload their pictures here in Wikimedia Commons. You can't do it like that, everyone has to have the same rights. Now to the statement by E4024: There are many photographers who are just as active at sporting events and take photos. But these do not easily overcome the relevance criteria here in Wikidata if they do not have a Wikimedia article or, for example, a GND ID. -- 2003:DA:1719:3E3B:3869:F0B2:E257:ADC6 19:57, 16 June 2021 (UTC) I believe Wikidata serves two purposes, a general data repository and a shared resource used by the Wikimedia projects. WD:N 's sitelink rule reflects the latter. There are many items about Wikimedia categories that have no conceivable use outside of Wikimedia projects, for instance. I think items like this fall into the intersection of the two purposes, and require consideration on both. whym ( talk ) 11:25, 21 July 2021 (UTC) I see both the point of Whym and the point of E4024 not that way. With regard to the statement by Whym I would like to make two points. First: If it is so easy to get a structural use, then I can be happy about a lot of journalists so that you can identify that the journalist Max Mustermann wrote the newspaper articles with which you can prove data in the data object and in the data object can prove. Is that really the point of structural use? Second: If you do it that way, you put Wikimedia Commons photographers above photographers who do not upload their pictures here in Wikimedia Commons. You can't do it like that, everyone has to have the same rights. Now to the statement by E4024: There are many photographers who are just as active at sporting events and take photos. But these do not easily overcome the relevance criteria here in Wikidata if they do not have a Wikimedia article or, for example, a GND ID. -- 2003:DA:1719:3E3B:3869:F0B2:E257:ADC6 19:57, 16 June 2021 (UTC) I believe Wikidata serves two purposes, a general data repository and a shared resource used by the Wikimedia projects. WD:N 's sitelink rule reflects the latter. There are many items about Wikimedia categories that have no conceivable use outside of Wikimedia projects, for instance. I think items like this fall into the intersection of the two purposes, and require consideration on both. whym ( talk ) 11:25, 21 July 2021 (UTC) I see both the point of Whym and the point of E4024 not that way. With regard to the statement by Whym I would like to make two points. First: If it is so easy to get a structural use, then I can be happy about a lot of journalists so that you can identify that the journalist Max Mustermann wrote the newspaper articles with which you can prove data in the data object and in the data object can prove. Is that really the point of structural use? Second: If you do it that way, you put Wikimedia Commons photographers above photographers who do not upload their pictures here in Wikimedia Commons. You can't do it like that, everyone has to have the same rights. Now to the statement by E4024: There are many photographers who are just as active at sporting events and take photos. But these do not easily overcome the relevance criteria here in Wikidata if they do not have a Wikimedia article or, for example, a GND ID. -- 2003:DA:1719:3E3B:3869:F0B2:E257:ADC6 19:57, 16 June 2021 (UTC) I believe Wikidata serves two purposes, a general data repository and a shared resource used by the Wikimedia projects. WD:N 's sitelink rule reflects the latter. There are many items about Wikimedia categories that have no conceivable use outside of Wikimedia projects, for instance. I think items like this fall into the intersection of the two purposes, and require consideration on both. whym ( talk ) 11:25, 21 July 2021 (UTC) That may be a reason to keep the Commons category, but not the data object here. A commons category can do without a Wikidata object. -- 2003:DA:1707:C869:28A3:78A5:7ADD:31BB 10:54, 6 September 2021 (UTC) At first, I create this, so there's no "self-promotion". Simply a cowardly atteck, made as an IP. 2nd, Sandro is a well known sports photographer, aprticipated in several sports event as official photographer, so as several World Championships and two Youth Olympic Games. Sandro is one of these photographers, sportspersons came to, to have pictures taken with him. Especially in Ice canal sports as Luge, Skeleton and Bob but also beyond, he is at our time one of the most well known photographers. 3rd: in the Wikiversy, Sandro is very well known of organizer of some very high class and perfect organized events, so as two WikiCon's with several 100s attendees for the german language Communities and uncountable photographing projects in politics, sports and culture. 4th: often in media, most recently last week here . I am really angry about this request. -- Marcus Cyron ( talk ) 09:50, 8 September 2021 (UTC) @ E4024 : If the newspaper article is still inserted into the data object and the many self-promotion statements and the statements without a reference are removed, then the data object can remain from my point of view. Beacause  I am a dynamic IP, it is a little difficult to withdraw the application. -- 2003:DA:170B:EBDC:4C86:F2FA:28E2:5A77 08:51, 15 September 2021 (UTC) Not done Seems notable. Thanks. Mike Peel ( talk ) 21:22, 3 November 2021 (UTC)