Talk:Into the Jaws of Death

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Into the Jaws of Death article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: North America / United States / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force

Photography Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts

Burning

Judging by this version here the rendition used to illustrate this article has had the sky heavily burned in order to look more dramatic. At which point did this edited version become the standard, and who edited it? -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 23:09, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Although the photograph in the article is cropped differently, it does appear to have been edited in some manner. By careful comparisons of specific portions of each photograph, the one in this article is definitely darker in certain areas. What do you suggest...go back to the original? It works for me if that is what needs to be done. Cuprum17 (talk) 23:25, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Or compare it with this, which is the same picture uploaded under a different name. This appears to have been a former feature picture which was presumably rejected because of damage to the print, and I surmise because it's less dramatic than the version with the burned sky. My hypothesis is that this image - with the dull grey clouds - is an accurate rendition of the original negative, but at some point someone at a newspaper decided to make it look more ominous, and the edited version has become the new standard. You see the same kind of thing with the famous shot of the landing craft on its way to the beach - the top of the ramp and the chap in the top-left have been burned-in. It'd be interesting to know what it looked like when it first appeared in a newspaper, presumably on June 7th. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 11:15, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ashley Pomeroy, I changed the image after the edited version was selected as FP over the "original". As far as I know, the editing process was done by a Wikipedian to the standards they saw as improved quality (not by any newspaper), and this is what the FP folks found the best image. I'm not sure I agree with this standard, but it seemed best to defer to the FP process consensus on this - I honestly don't know the line between technical improvement of an image that may have degraded over time, and overcreative editing for dramatic effect that may be ahistorical.--Pharos (talk) 16:35, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image caption

The caption for the image is a bit too long to fit the criteria of WP:CAPTION and should be shortened. However, I don't think this prevents it from meeting B5. --Lineagegeek (talk) 22:56, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Into the Jaws of Death 23-0455M edit.jpg to appear as POTD

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Into the Jaws of Death 23-0455M edit.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 6, 2015. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2015-06-06. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the day

Into the Jaws of Death is a historic photograph taken on June 6, 1944, by Robert F. Sargent, a chief photographer's mate in the United States Coast Guard. It depicts U.S. Army's 1st Infantry Division soldiers disembarking from an LCVP (Landing Craft, Vehicle, Personnel) from the U.S. Coast Guard-manned USS Samuel Chase at Omaha Beach during the Normandy Landings in World War II. The photograph became one of the most commonly reproduced images of the landing.Photograph: Robert F. Sargent

Archive – More featured pictures...

Proposed merge from Robert F. Sargent

We currently have a separate article on Robert F. Sargent, the photographer of this image. He does not seem to me to be separately notable, or to have taken any other notable photographs, and I propose merging his article into this one. None of the sources cited in that article currently discuss Sargent other than a brief mention as the photographer of "Into the Jaws of Death". There's also a long-running dispute on that article about even the most basic biographical information – per Talk:Robert F. Sargent#Birth and Death Dates there seems to be reason to believe that the dates given in the article are those of a different Robert Sargent, and the sources have taken those dates from Wikipedia. Given all of this, I can see no good reason to have a separate article on Sargent – it would make more sense to cover what little we know about him (which is basically nothing other than that he was from New Jersey and in the Coast Guard) in this article Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 18:54, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SUPPORT. My main concern is that all details that are cited in the original articles are included in the merged article and that American English be used. Cuprum17 (talk) 12:57, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me that there simply has to be enough information out there to expand his article. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 02:46, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying definitively that reliable sources don't exist, but I looked reasonably hard and couldn't find anything online. Maybe someone with better access to US libraries and newspaper archives than me will be able to dig something up that I don't have access to. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:02, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]