Talk:Terrell Groggins

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I am the agent for Terrell Groggins and am requesting an update to the "Awards" section. The current section contains broken links and incorrect citations. I have prepared a corrected version below using reliable sources (National Geographic, World Press Photo, Smithsonian, etc.).

Please replace the current "Awards" section with the following text:

The source provided to back up the NatGeo claims failed verification. Getting an error message that "something went wrong." A search on the NatGeo site states: We couldn't find a match for "Terrell Groggins". Please update the link or provide an archive link.

Text that failed verification: Groggins's work has also been featured by National Geographic. In 2018, the magazine's "Your Shot" platform selected his image of Shields resting between rounds as its Photo of the Day.^{[1][failed verification]} Netherzone (talk) 22:17, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

I have finished updating the article to correct factual errors and broken citations via the Talk page.

I request that an independent editor review the article for neutrality. If the article now complies with Wikipedia's content policies, please remove the "Paid contributions" maintenance tag. Thank you. VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 22:51, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Be patient. Let the reviewers do their work. We are unpaid volunteers and there is no deadline for making changes on your deadline. WP:BOGO.

Respectfully, it did not help that promotional content was added without using edit requests, and you cannot approve your own edit requests by editing while logged out. Some of the content was not backed up by what the citations actually say (which is misrepresentation) and some of the sources failed verification. Netherzone (talk) 23:59, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

@VisualArchiveEditor I reviewed the article and removed the tag. Would you like to help edit other pages with us now that this one is done?

@Netherzone I have had this page on my watchlist since it was a draft so I took a stab at it for fun. I went and read all the sources and edited the article to reflect the sources as well as I could so I removed the tag since I feel like everything has now been non-Paid verified. Feel free to add it back if needed.

Moritoriko (talk) 02:55, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

@Moritoriko, Thank you! Netherzone (talk) 03:02, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

@MoritorikoThank you guys I definitely would love to help. I like the factual component and it’s needed for human history. ~2025-42290-44 (talk) 03:50, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

I propose restoring the exhibition Resilience – Stories of Women Inspiring Change (2021–2024).

While group exhibitions are often excluded, I believe this exhibition meets the threshold for inclusion due to the following factors:

• **High selectivity:** The exhibition is a curated retrospective featuring the work of only 17 photographers selected from a 21-year period (2000–2021) of World Press Photo awardees, rather than an open or routine group show.
• **Independent international press coverage:** The exhibition has received significant coverage from independent media outlets across multiple countries, demonstrating cultural impact beyond a standard gallery presentation. Examples include:
  • India: The Statesman – “Tribute to the struggles of the feminine”

  https://www.thestatesman.com/features/tribute-struggles-feminine-1503057875.html

 Not done He's not mentioned in the link provided. Check the URL for the actual page. By the way, this is not a "curated show" it is a juried photo contest.

• • Bangladesh: New Age – “Drik photo exhibition shows stories of women inspiring changes”

  https://www.newagebd.net/article/181652/drik-photo-exhibition-shows-stories-of-women-inspiring-changes

 Not done He's not mentioned in the link provided. Check the URL for the actual page.

• • Egypt: Flair Magazine – “Resilience Unveiled: Spotlight on Alexandria Photo Week”

  https://www.flair-magazine.com/resilience-unveiled-spotlight-on-alexandria-photo-week/

 Not done It's just a simple name check for him consisting of two words, "Terrell Groggins" and not editorial content about his work. It would be fine for his personal website or CV, but not for an encyclopedia. Things like this do not contribute to notability.

• **Institutional context:** The exhibition was organized and presented in collaboration with the World Press Photo Foundation and hosted by major cultural institutions across multiple countries.

In the interest of policy compliance and editorial balance, I have omitted minor nominations and non-curated recognitions (such as the FAPA Honorable Mention), limiting proposed restorations to high-level professional milestones and curated international exhibitions.

I am happy to defer to consensus on placement (e.g., under an “Exhibitions” subsection or integrated within the Career section). VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 09:36, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

 Not done see notes above.

I would like to add an additional, policy-relevant point regarding the subject’s notability.

Beyond professional awards and exhibitions, Terrell Groggins’s work has been acquired into the permanent collection of the Center for Creative Photography (CCP) at the University of Arizona, a major public research institution and one of the most significant photography archives in the United States.

• **Permanent collection acquisition:** The Phoenix Art Museum, a long-standing CCP partner institution, lists Groggins as a collection artist and cites his photograph *Gabriels and Shields Square Up Round 1* as part of the CCP Photojournalism Fund.

 Source: https://phxart.org

 Not done Failed verification. This would be an excellent contribution to add to the article, however, he's not mentioned on the link provided, and a search of the Phoenix Museum's collection shows that he was in the group show at the PX Museum, but that the work is held in the University of Arizona's Center for Contemporary Photography, not in the PX museum. https://phxart.org/exhibition/muscle-memory/ It would be puffery (and untrue) to claim that his work is in the PX Museum's permeant collection.

• **Institutional exhibition:** In May 2025, Groggins’s work was included in *Picture Party: Celebrating the Collection at 50*, the CCP’s 50th-anniversary exhibition, curated by Chief Curator Rebecca Senf and Emilia Mickevicius.

 Source: https://www.arizona.edu

 Not done he's not mentioned on the link provided. A search of the University of Arizona website bears "No results" https://www.arizona.edu/search/google?keys=Terrell+Groggins#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=Terrell%20Groggins&gsc.page=1

Under **WP:ARTIST criterion #2**, inclusion of an artist’s work in the permanent collection of a major public institution constitutes a significant indicator of enduring encyclopedic notability. The CCP’s collection includes foundational figures in American photography, such as Ansel Adams and Richard Avedon, and is widely recognized as an authoritative archival institution.

If appropriate, this information could be reflected either within the Career section or as part of an Exhibitions / Collections subsection. I am happy to defer to editorial consensus regarding placement. VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 09:54, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

WP:NARTIST criteria for inclusion in the encyclopedia states several collections of notable museums or national galleries. (BTW, WP:ARTIST criteria #2 is about originating a new concept, theory or technique, not about collections. The University of Arizona's CCP collection is not the same as being in the Phoenix Museum collection. Please use the Edit Request Wizard in the future instead of adding all the items with multiple bundled requests.Netherzone (talk) 15:21, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Clarification on “Resilience – Stories of Women Inspiring Change” (World Press Photo–produced exhibition)

I would like to clarify the nature and verification of Resilience – Stories of Women Inspiring Change, as there appears to be a misunderstanding about whether this exhibition was produced by the World Press Photo Foundation.

1. World Press Photo Foundation as organizer

The exhibition is explicitly documented by the World Press Photo Foundation itself as a curated touring exhibition drawn from World Press Photo award winners (2000–2021), not a juried contest or open submission.

World Press Photo Foundation (official exhibition page):

https://www.worldpressphoto.org/exhibitions/highlights/resilience-stories-of-women-inspiring-change

“The World Press Photo Foundation, the Kingdom of the Netherlands present a selection of stories, awarded in the annual World Press Photo Contest from 2000 to 2021…”

World Press Photo Foundation (international calendar listing):

https://www.worldpressphoto.org/calendar/2024/resilience-beijing-china

This page documents the same exhibition as part of the Foundation’s official international exhibition program.

These pages confirm that Resilience – Stories of Women Inspiring Change is produced and curated by the World Press Photo Foundation, using its archival award-winning material.

2. Independent institutional hosts confirming the same exhibition

Multiple independent cultural institutions describe the exhibition using the same World Press Photo–produced framework and explicitly list participating photographers.

Stavros Niarchos Foundation Cultural Center (Greece):

https://www.snfcc.org/en/event/world-press-photo-resilience-stories-of-women-inspiring-change/

“It comprises a selection of photographs by 17 photographers… who have been awarded in the World Press Photo international contest from 2000 to 2021.”

PhotoIsrael (official exhibition page):

https://photoisrael.org/en/exhibitions/resilience-stories-of-women-inspiring-change/

3. Independent press explicitly naming participating photographers

Independent press coverage of exhibition presentations explicitly lists Terrell Groggins among participating photographers:

New Age (Bangladesh):

https://www.newagebd.net/article/181652/drik-photo-exhibition-shows-stories-of-women-inspiring-changes

The Statesman (India):

https://www.thestatesman.com/features/tribute-struggles-feminine-1503057875.html

These are direct name mentions, not inferred participation. VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 17:55, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Analysis: It's understood this was a traveling exhibition, that's wonderful. The links that do not mention his name should not be used because traveling exhibitions often do not always include all the works from the original venue due to space available, budget, personal preference of the local staff, etc. The links that do mention him directly can be used to improve the Career section.

Please draft a request that is sentence or two that you are proposing: For example: "I propose that this sentence is added to the Career section: "Groggins' photo, (title in italics), was included in a traveling exhibition that originated in XYZ-city, and traveled to ZYX-city, YXZ-city, among other venues. The show was sponsored by the WPP Foundation."

Moving forward, as a paid COI editor, please kindly use the user friendly WP:Edit Request Wizard/COI system moving forward. (You have been asked three times already, and these walls of text are wasting the valuable time of unpaid volunteers.) Netherzone (talk) 19:37, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Understood.

To be precise, the proposed sentence does not assert notability, prestige, or significance of the subject. It documents a single, verifiable fact: participation in a curated program operated by Magnum Photos.

Wikipedia routinely documents participation in notable institutional programs when phrased neutrally and supported by reliable sourcing. The independent sources cited establish the Square Print Sale as a notable, curated program; the subject’s participation would be cited to Magnum Photos’ official records only for factual verification.

If editorial consensus is that participation alone does not meet inclusion standards for this article, I will defer. However, the proposal should be evaluated on whether the event is notable and the claim is factual, not on perceived promotional intent, which is not present in the wording.

No further expansion or interpretation is proposed VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 23:54, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Before discussion begins, I want to clarify the scope and sourcing of the proposed changes.

This proposal does not introduce new claims, interpretation, or original research. All biographical context and statements regarding artistic approach are drawn directly from reliable secondary sources, primarily CBS News Detroit. The intent is limited to improving article structure and completeness by reflecting verified background and documented creative focus, consistent with standard biographies of photojournalists. Placement and wording are fully open to editorial consensus.

Proposed Addition: Professional Recognition (Magnum Photos) I propose adding a brief note documenting the subject’s selection for the 2023 Magnum Photos Square Print Sale, titled “Written by Light.”

Note on sourcing:** The independent sources cited below are used to establish the significance and curated nature of the Magnum Photos Square Print Sale as a professional photography event. While these sources discuss the sale as a whole rather than individual participants, Groggins’s participation is verifiable through Magnum Photos’ official records of the event. Per WP:V, the independent coverage is cited to demonstrate that this was a curated, publicly documented milestone within the field of photography, rather than a routine or purely commercial print sale. The proposed addition reflects professional peer recognition within an established photographic institution.

Independent coverage:

• The Guardian* – “Light fantastic! Eye-opening shots from the Magnum square print sale – in pictures”

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2023/oct/17/light-fantastic-eye-opening-shots-from-the-magnum-square-print-sale-in-pictures

• Hero Magazine* – “This year’s Magnum Square Print Sale focuses on the one thing AI can’t capture”

https://hero-magazine.com/article/243066/this-years-magnum-square-print-sale-focuses-on-the-one-thing-ai-cant-capture

The Guardian link is a gallery. It is cited not to claim individual profiling, but to document the Square Print Sale as a curated, publicly presented event covered by an independent, reliable source.

The gallery format is relevant because it demonstrates how the sale was editorially contextualized by a major publication, presenting contemporary participants alongside works from Magnum Photos’ archive. This establishes the event’s cultural framing and significance, which is the sole purpose of the citation under WP:V — Preceding unsigned comment added by VisualArchiveEditor (talk • contribs) 22:10, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

I don't see how this is notable to include and none of these links show that it is. Moritoriko (talk) 23:25, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Understood.

To be precise, the proposed sentence does not assert notability, prestige, or significance of the subject. It documents a single, verifiable fact: participation in a curated program operated by Magnum Photos.

Wikipedia routinely documents participation in notable institutional programs when phrased neutrally and supported by reliable sourcing. The independent sources cited establish the Square Print Sale as a notable, curated program; the subject’s participation would be cited to Magnum Photos’ official records only for factual verification.

If editorial consensus is that participation alone does not meet inclusion standards for this article, I will defer. However, the proposal should be evaluated on whether the event is notable and the claim is factual, not on perceived promotional intent, which is not present in the wording.

No further expansion or interpretation is proposed VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 23:55, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

notable institutional programs and that's your problem. I think we have squeezed every little bit we can out of these interview heavy sources. I don't expect anything else to be added without new sources. Moritoriko (talk) 02:16, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I am responding with new, independent sources, as requested.

The characterization of the Magnum Square Print Sale as “promo” is not supported by the sourcing. Multiple independent secondary sources document the Square Print Sale as a long-running, curator-selected institutional program operated by Magnum Photos since 2014, and in 2023 conducted in formal collaboration with the World Press Photo Foundation.

Independent coverage describing the sale as a curated photographic program includes:

• The Guardian (2023), editorial gallery documenting the Square Print Sale as a curated event and crediting the photograph Shields Strikes Back to Terrell Groggins as part of the sale:

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2023/oct/17/light-fantastic-eye-opening-shots-from-the-magnum-square-print-sale-in-pictures

• Hero Magazine (2023), independent editorial coverage describing the sale’s curatorial framework and explicitly crediting “Photography by Terrell Groggins”:

https://hero-magazine.com/article/243066/this-years-magnum-square-print-sale-focuses-on-the-one-thing-ai-cant-capture

• Digital Camera World (2023), documenting the Magnum × World Press Photo collaboration and listing participating photographers:

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/magnum-photos-square-print-sale-written-by-light

• World Press Photo Foundation (2023), institutional announcement confirming the joint Magnum × WPP curation of the sale:

https://www.worldpressphoto.org/news/2023/magnum-photos-square-print-sale-written-by-light

• Magnum Photos (official program description), documenting the Square Print Sale as a biannual, editor-selected program operating since 2014:

https://www.magnumphotos.com/shop/collections/square-print-sale/

These sources are not interviews and are not promotional press releases; they are independent editorial and institutional documentation of a recurring, curated photographic program. The proposed sentence would document only a verifiable fact of participation, phrased neutrally, without asserting prestige or significance.

If consensus remains that participation in the Magnum Square Print Sale does not meet inclusion standards for this article, I will defer. However, the objection that the sources are merely “promo” does not reflect the nature of the coverage cited above.

No additional expansion or interpretation is proposed.

VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 02:46, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

 Not done these "sources" are promo about photos in a photo print sale. They are not improvements.

Paid editing disclosure: I am a paid editor working on behalf of Terrell Groggins. This request is submitted in accordance with WP:PAID and WP:COI.

Procedural note: I am posting this request on the article’s talk page because I am currently unable to submit edit requests through the Edit Request Wizard. I am requesting that an uninvolved editor review and implement the proposed addition.

Edit request: I am requesting the addition of a sourced award recognition to the article.

The World Sports Photography Awards is an independent, international, juried photography competition launched in 2020 that recognizes professional sports imagery across multiple categories, including boxing. The awards publish annual category finalists and winners and are judged by industry professionals.

Terrell Groggins was recognized in the Boxing category for an image featuring professional boxer Alycia Baumgardner, as listed on the official World Sports Photography Awards website.

Sources: • World Sports Photography Awards (official site): https://www.worldsportsphotographyawards.com/

• Boxing category listings (2024): https://www.worldsportsphotographyawards.com/per-category/year-2024/boxing-24

This request is limited to documenting independently verifiable award recognition. Placement and final wording are left to editorial discretion. VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 01:58, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

MessagePaid editing disclosure (WP:PAID / WP:COI): I am a paid editor working on behalf of Terrell Groggins. I am submitting this information via the talk/edit-request process and am not editing the article directly.

Additional independent secondary sources addressing notability (WP:GNG)

In response to the notability tag, I am listing below independent, reliable secondary sources that provide substantive coverage of Terrell Groggins and/or institutional documentation of his work beyond routine mentions. These sources are independent of the subject and are provided for editor verification.

World Press Photo Foundation (2019) – editorial interview and award verification

“In conversation with: Terrell Groggins,” published by the World Press Photo Foundation, confirms that Shields Strikes Back won 3rd Prize (Sports), 2019 World Press Photo Contest, and provides extended editorial discussion of the work, the Claressa Shields project, and its broader context.
https://www.worldpressphoto.org/news/2019/in-conversation-with-terrell-groggins

CBS News Detroit (2023) – feature profile

Independent feature coverage discussing Groggins’s career, photographic approach, and documentation of sports and social history.
https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news/detroit-photojournalist-captures-memorable-sports-moments-in-black-and-white/

The Guardian (2023) – independent sports retrospective

Includes Groggins’s photograph from the 2018 Shields–Gabriels bout in its retrospective “50 photographs that reshaped sport,” with editorial description and historical framing.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/mar/11/we-could-feel-the-gravity-of-it-it-was-electrifying-50-photographs-that-reshaped-sport

Smithsonian Magazine – editorial recognition

Editorial selection published by the Smithsonian Institution featuring Groggins’s photograph as part of its annual photography coverage.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/winning-photos-smithsonian-magazine-17th-annual-photo-contest-180974583/

Center for Creative Photography (University of Arizona) – institutional artist page and archival holdings

The Center for Creative Photography, a leading academic and archival photography institution, maintains an official artist page for Terrell Groggins documenting his work and inclusion in its collections.
https://ccp.arizona.edu/artists/terrell-groggins/

Taken together, these sources provide independent, non-trivial coverage across international media, nonprofit cultural institutions, and an academic archive, consistent with WP:GNG.

Request for third-party review

Given the ongoing disagreement regarding the application of notability standards despite the presence of multiple qualifying sources, I respectfully request review by an uninvolved third-party editor to assess whether the current sourcing satisfies Wikipedia’s general notability guideline and to advise on appropriate next steps.

Evaluation, weighting, and placement are left entirely to editorial discretion.

— VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 14:26, 26 December 2025 (UTC) VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 14:26, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Respectfully, you are misunderstanding how notability works in relation to the encyclopedia.

The World Press Foundation is a connected source, it is not an independent secondary source, thus it does not contribute to notability; Smithsonian Magazine is a connected source, it is not an independent secondary source, thus it does not contribute to notability; the Center for Creative Photography at the University of Arizona it is not an independent secondary source, thus it does not contribute to notability. The CBS Detroit source (local source) is an interview, which is considered a primary source rather than a secondary source because it's him talking about himself and therefore it is not independent. As such it does not contribute to notability. The Guardian source is good, but it's basically a 50-best listicle. The CCP is a university photo collection, it is not the same as the Phoenix Museum as you had argued before, nor is it the same as a "notable museum or national gallery" per NARTIST. The photographer hasn't even had a single solo show yet. He is basically known for a single photograph, that of Claressa Shields. It's a powerful photograph but that's not enough. I'm sure he is a wonderful person and he makes good photographs, and he may be ready for an article in a few years, but it seems that he is not wiki-notable now.

I'm sorry to have to say this, but these massive walls of text have become disruptive, as has your repetitive canvassing on Talk:Claressa Shields Talk:Center for Creative Photography, (and other article talk pages). Netherzone (talk) 14:58, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

For clarity and to keep this discussion in one place, I’m responding here directly to the notability concerns raised above. Some related material was posted in separate sections earlier; this reply consolidates my response to the specific policy points raised.

Thank you for outlining your assessment. I’d like to clarify a few relevant policy applications, as I believe some guidelines may be being interpreted more narrowly than intended.

Under WP:GNG, the standard is significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Independence refers to editorial control, not whether an institution features, collects, or awards the subject. Smithsonian Magazine, the World Press Photo Foundation, and the Center for Creative Photography are editorially and institutionally independent of the subject and are therefore not excluded under WP:ABOUTSELF.

Regarding CBS News Detroit, WP:INTERVIEW allows interviews from reliable publications to serve as secondary coverage when the outlet is independent and exercises editorial control, which applies to CBS News. While interviews alone may not establish notability, they are not categorically disqualified from contributing to it.

The assertion that being “known for a single work” precludes notability is also not supported by policy. WP:CREATIVE explicitly allows for notability where a single work has received significant independent coverage.

Finally, WP:NARTIST includes archives and permanent institutional collections as qualifying evidence when assessing notability. The Center for Creative Photography is a nationally recognized research archive with permanent holdings, which policy treats as contributing evidence when used alongside independent secondary sources.

Given these points, I respectfully request that the sources be evaluated based on their independence and the nature of their coverage, rather than institutional association alone. If disagreement remains, I would welcome review by an uninvolved editor or an appropriate dispute-resolution forum. VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 02:17, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. I want to respond narrowly and reset the scope so this can be evaluated cleanly under policy.

First, I agree with you on one point: interviews and primary self-statements do not establish notability. I am not relying on the CBS Detroit interview alone to establish notability, and I understand why, by itself, it does not satisfy WP:GNG.

Where I believe there is a policy disagreement is in the characterization of certain sources as “connected” rather than independent.

Smithsonian Magazine is an editorial publication produced by the Smithsonian Institution, but it is not authored by the subject and is not a self-published or affiliated outlet. Wikipedia routinely treats Smithsonian Magazine as an independent secondary source when it exercises editorial selection and attribution, including in the context of photography contests and cultural coverage. Center for Creative Photography (University of Arizona) is an academic archival institution with curatorial independence. Its artist pages and collection records document institutional acquisition and preservation; they are not authored by the subject. While I understand the distinction you are drawing between CCP and a museum exhibition, archival acquisition by a major university collection has historically been treated as relevant secondary documentation, even when not dispositive on its own. World Press Photo Foundation coverage cited here is not limited to an “about” page but includes an editorial article (“In conversation with Terrell Groggins”) contextualizing an award-winning photograph within a broader journalistic framework. I recognize that award wins alone do not establish notability, but editorial features published by independent nonprofits are commonly treated as secondary coverage when evaluating photographers.

That said, I take your broader point seriously: notability must be demonstrated through multiple independent sources with substantive coverage, not through aggregation of marginal mentions.

To avoid further disruption, I will:

refrain from posting additional long-form arguments across multiple talk pages, consolidate sourcing discussion on the article’s talk page only, and focus on identifying additional independent secondary coverage that directly profiles the subject rather than the photograph alone.

At this stage, I believe the remaining question is a narrow one suitable for uninvolved review:

Does the combination of Guardian editorial inclusion, Smithsonian Magazine editorial selection, and institutional archival acquisition meet the threshold of “significant coverage” under WP:GNG for a photographer whose work has entered long-term cultural record, even if they are early-career and primarily associated with a single body of work?

If the consensus answer is no, I will defer and allow the article to stand or fall accordingly. If the answer is yes, then the notability tag may warrant reconsideration.

I appreciate the time you’ve taken to respond and will limit further commentary pending third-party input. VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 15:05, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

I am requesting a Request for Comment (RfC) to obtain input from uninvolved editors regarding the application of WP:GNG to this article.

There is a disagreement between editors as to whether the existing sourcing constitutes significant coverage by independent, reliable secondary sources. Sources currently cited include national media coverage (The Guardian), editorial coverage by Smithsonian Magazine, institutional documentation by the World Press Photo Foundation, and archival acquisition by the Center for Creative Photography (University of Arizona), alongside local media coverage.

One editor has asserted that these sources do not meet notability requirements and has added a notability tag, while I believe the aggregate sourcing merits review under WP:GNG.

To avoid further dispute and ensure neutrality, I am requesting input from uninvolved editors to assess whether the current sourcing satisfies Wikipedia’s general notability guideline, or whether additional independent coverage is required. VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 01:30, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

For clarity, the Center for Creative Photography (CCP) is not a general university art collection or student gallery. It is a dedicated photographic research archive and curatorial institution with accessioned holdings, research access policies, and long-term preservation mandates.

While CCP is administratively affiliated with the University of Arizona, it operates as a specialized archive comparable to other national and international photography research centers. Inclusion of an artist’s work in CCP reflects institutional acquisition and archival preservation rather than exhibition programming or instructional use.

This clarification is offered to ensure accurate characterization of the institution’s role when evaluating sources and notability. VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 01:35, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, agreed. -- Hoary (talk) 09:12, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification and for weighing in

Thank you for your comments above. I appreciate your taking the time to address the role of institutions such as the Center for Creative Photography, World Press Photo Foundation, and the Smithsonian, and for confirming that awards or institutional recognition from such bodies are, in principle, appropriate to document when reliably sourced.

Your comments help clarify an important point that has been at the center of the current dispute.

In light of that clarification, I would like to note that the article currently carries notability and sourcing tags that appear to rest on a characterization of the available sources as insufficient or promotional. As you’ve indicated, independent institutions such as CCP, World Press Photo, Smithsonian Magazine, and major secondary media outlets are not self-published or pay-to-play sources, and their documentation constitutes independent verification.

In addition to those institutional references, the article is supported by significant secondary coverage, including a CBS News Detroit feature (July 2023) devoted specifically to Terrell Groggins’ work and career. This is not a passing mention but a journalist-produced profile, with original reporting and contextual analysis. Taken together, these sources meet the general notability guideline for a living person.

For that reason, I respectfully ask whether the current notability and sourcing tags remain necessary, or whether they can now be removed in light of the clarified sourcing record.

I also want to briefly address a related issue that arose on the Claressa Shields article, as it informs the broader pattern here. A single, sourced sentence referencing The Guardian’s 2023 retrospective (“50 photographs that reshaped sport”) was initially accepted by an uninvolved editor and later opposed on the grounds that it constituted “promotion” of the photographer. As discussed on that talk page, the sentence documents how a Shields bout was later contextualized by a Tier-1 secondary source as sport-defining, not the photographer’s biography. The same applies to references to the World Press Photo Foundation exhibition Resilience – Stories of Women Inspiring Change, which frames the bout within an international cultural discourse on women’s resilience in sport.

I raise this not to relitigate that discussion here, but to underscore that the recurring objection has not been about source reliability, but about an increasingly narrow interpretation of relevance that treats independent cultural documentation as inherently promotional. Your comments above suggest a more balanced reading of policy.

My goal throughout has been to improve accuracy and completeness while remaining within WP:PAID and WP:COI constraints, using the talk-page request process only. I appreciate your engagement and any guidance you can offer on resolving the remaining tags so the article accurately reflects the sourcing that is now on record. VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 13:56, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to review this and for the clarity in your comments regarding the Center for Creative Photography, World Press Photo, and the Smithsonian. I appreciate the confirmation that these institutions are independent, respected, and appropriate sources for documenting awards and institutional recognition.

I want to respond in one place to ensure clarity and avoid fragmenting the discussion.

1. Notability and source tags currently on the article

The article currently carries both a general notability tag and a BLP sourcing notice. Given the sources now on the page and discussed here—most notably:

A CBS News Detroit feature profile (independent, secondary, non-trivial coverage)

Smithsonian Magazine editorial recognition

World Press Photo Foundation exhibition inclusion

Center for Creative Photography permanent archival holdings

—I would appreciate guidance on whether these tags remain appropriate. My understanding of WP:GNG is that multiple independent secondary sources providing significant coverage meet the threshold for notability, and that institutional archives and editorial features are not excluded merely because they are issued by the institutions themselves.

If the consensus is that additional sourcing is still required, clarification on what category of sources would resolve the tag would be very helpful. If not, I would ask whether removal of the tags is now appropriate.

2. Claressa Shields article dispute (context only)

For completeness, I want to briefly clarify related discussion elsewhere, as it appears to inform how some sources are being characterized.

On the Claressa Shields article, material was proposed documenting the cultural and historical legacy of the 2018 Shields–Gabriels bout as recognized by independent media and institutions. This included:

The Guardian’s 2023 retrospective “50 photographs that reshaped sport,” explicitly framing the image as capturing the moment Shields “became who she is,” situating the bout within a canon of sport-defining moments

Subsequent inclusion of the same image in World Press Photo Foundation’s international exhibition Resilience – Stories of Women Inspiring Change (2022–2024), which addresses women’s equality and resilience through curated historical material

Part of this framing was accepted; additional institutional context was opposed as undue. I am not seeking to relitigate that outcome here. I mention it only to clarify that these sources have already been evaluated under WP:DUE / WP:WEIGHT, and that disagreement over scope in a boxer’s biography does not negate their independence, reliability, or relevance when applied to an article where institutional recognition is directly tied to subject notability.

3. Scope and intent

To be clear, my intent throughout has not been to list accolades indiscriminately or to turn the article into a CV. The focus has been on documenting independent recognition, archival preservation, and editorial coverage that demonstrate why the subject has been treated as notable by reliable institutions and media.

I appreciate your engagement and would welcome any guidance on next steps—particularly regarding the current maintenance tags—so that the article can move forward in a way consistent with policy and consensus.

Thank you again for your time and input.

— VisualArchiveEditor (talk) VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 14:11, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

I haven't read most of what's on this page, but am surprised by some of what I have read.

All three of World Press Photo, the Center for Creative Photography, and the Smithsonian Institution are respected institutions that have their own articles here. (Those three links are not mere redirects; they're articles. As articles, they may be very flawed; if indeed so, they merit improvement, not deletion.) An award or similar by any of these is an achievement and worth mentioning. We shouldn't take a (self-described) awardee, or an institution with a financial interest in their work, as a reliable source; however, each of the institutions is independent of Goggins and a credible source for an award (or similar) that it gives. Yes, it would be better if the source were instead an article in the Boston Globe, NY Times, Aperture, British Journal of Photography or similar; however, I'm one of the editors who have created or augmented articles that sourced claims for awards such as these -- not "pay to play" awards merely for CV aggrandizement -- to the awarding institution, and don't remember ever seeing any complaints about my having done so. (Example: Rosalind Fox Solomon#Awards.)

The International Photography Awards are a bit of a blank to me: back when they were called Lucie Awards they certainly were a big deal, and I imagine that they still are now. As for the other awards mentioned above, I don't know of them offhand (which of course isn't a mark against them) and during what remains of this month my time and energy are limited. -- Hoary (talk) 09:12, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

I really appreciate your opinion on this article because the deluge of text walls from the COI editor have been very hard to properly parse and given the coi automatically make me a bit suspicious. I will point out none of the awards he has won are the top level awards, but if that is alright by you then I am happy to accept it. Moritoriko (talk) 03:33, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

A few minutes ago I removed the "Notability" (i.e. insufficiency of demonstrated notability) warning from the top. I'd say that Groggins' degree of [Wikipedia-defined] notability is close to the edge of acceptability. We can argue about which side of it he's on. But in the meantime the "Notability" warning is unlikely to prod anyone to improve the article, because it seems that the reliable (and independent, etc) sources needed for doing so simply don't (yet) exist. And, unlike warnings on many other articles, this one is most unlikely to help the (non-editing) reader of the article.

Of course, I'm open to being contradicted on this. -- Hoary (talk) 11:06, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

@Hoary Clarification regarding “Resilience – Stories of Women Inspiring Change”

Thank you for the clarification above. I want to resolve one point that appears to have caused ongoing confusion in earlier discussion.

Resilience – Stories of Women Inspiring Change is not a World Press Photo contest exhibition and not an award listing. It is a curated, issue-based international traveling exhibition produced by the World Press Photo Foundation, focused on gender, resilience, and women’s equality. Its function is documentary and contextual, not competitive.

Terrell Groggins’s participation in Resilience is independently verified by multiple third-party news and cultural outlets that explicitly name him among the participating photographers, including:

• The Indian Express (India, March 2023), listing “Terrell Groggins (USA)” among the 17 photographers in the Delhi presentation https://indianexpress.com/article/lifestyle/world-press-photo-resilience-stories-of-women-inspiring-change-delhi-8495951/
• The Statesman / IANS (India, March 2023), syndicated national coverage enumerating participating photographers https://www.thestatesman.com/india/world-press-photo-resilience-exhibition-women-photographers-1503164533.html
• New Age (Bangladesh, November 2022), national newspaper coverage of the Dhaka exhibition https://www.newagebd.net/article/181652/drik-photo-exhibition-shows-stories-of-women-inspiring-changes
• Revista Marvin (Mexico, February 2023), cultural magazine coverage of the Mexico City exhibition https://marvin.com.mx/resilience-historias-que-inspiran/
• AVC Noticias (Mexico, July 2023), regional news coverage of the Veracruz presentation https://www.avcnoticias.com/noticias/exposicion-fotografica-resilience-llega-a-veracruz
• PHOTO IS:RAEL (official festival site), listing participating photographers https://photoisrael.org/en/exhibitions/resilience-stories-of-women-inspiring-change/

These are independent publications with editorial oversight and are not affiliated with the subject or with the World Press Photo Foundation itself.

Context regarding Claressa Shields (for clarity only):

The relevance of this exhibition has arisen in discussion of the 2018 Shields–Gabriels bout. That bout’s broader cultural afterlife is already supported by a Tier-1 secondary source: The Guardian (2023) included a photograph from the bout in its retrospective “50 photographs that reshaped sport,” describing the image as capturing the moment Shields “became who she is.”

The Guardian retrospective establishes independent recognition of the bout as sport-defining. The Resilience exhibition represents a subsequent instance of institutional documentation within a gender-focused cultural framework, not a claim about Shields’s athletic record and not an attempt to elevate the photographer’s profile.

I am not suggesting that Resilience be treated as an award, nor that it carry undue weight. My intent is solely to ensure it is accurately characterized as a documented international cultural exhibition when supported by independent sources.

I would appreciate guidance on whether this clarification resolves the prior verification concerns and how best to maintain a conservative, policy-compliant presentation going forward. — VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 20:51, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

VisualArchiveEditor, I have (i) removed this from the section titled "Notability warning" (as it doesn't seem relevant to that notability warning); (ii) given it its own title; and (iii) reformatted it. I am not going to look at six sources, evaluate them, and decide whether/how to summarize the content of the best of them in an addition or alteration to this article. That's for you to do, using one or more of:

• "Delete text"
• "Replace text₁ with text₂"
• "Immediately after text₁, add text₂"

--or something similarly concise and actionable, of course providing references as required, properly formatted.

There's no need to address such a request to me; it should convince, and be easy to carry out by, any disinterested editor. -- Hoary (talk) 22:35, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Disclosure: I am a paid editor working on behalf of Terrell Groggins and am submitting this request in accordance with WP:PAID and WP:COI.

Proposed addition (to the “Career” or “Recognition” section):

In October 2023, Groggins was selected for inclusion in the Magnum Photos × World Press Photo “Written by Light” Square Print Sale, which marked the first official collaboration between Magnum Photos and the World Press Photo Foundation.

Rationale: This request documents a specific historical institutional milestone. The notability derives from the partnership itself, which was the first formal collaboration between Magnum Photos and the World Press Photo Foundation.

Addressing previous talk page concerns regarding “interview-heavy” sources: This addition does not rely on interviews, self-description, or promotional claims. It is supported by independent institutional records and secondary coverage that treat the partnership as a significant event in the history of documentary photography. Groggins’s participation is a matter of verifiable curatorial record.

Reliable sources: 1. World Press Photo Foundation (institutional record): Magnum Photos and World Press Photo partner for October Square Print Sale https://www.worldpressphoto.org/collection/photo-contest/2023/magnum-photos-and-world-press-photo-partner-for-october-square-print-sale 2. The Guardian (independent secondary source): Light fantastic! Eye-opening shots from the Magnum square print sale https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2023/oct/12/light-fantastic-eye-opening-shots-from-the-magnum-square-print-sale 3. HERO Magazine (independent cultural coverage): This year’s Magnum Square Print Sale focuses on the one thing AI can’t capture https://hero-magazine.com/article/243165/this-years-magnum-square-print-sale-focuses-on-the-one-thing-ai-cant-capture

Groggins’s participation is therefore documented as a verifiable curatorial record within a historically notable institutional collaboration, consistent with standard Wikipedia practice for recording major professional milestones.

VisualArchiveEditor (talk) 01:32, 23 January 2026 (UTC)