Talk:Oded Wagenstein

Request to Reopen Draft – Oded Wagenstein

Hello @Itzcuauhtli11,

Thank you for reviewing the Oded Wagenstein draft. I've addressed the issues you raised:

All direct links have been replaced with properly formatted citation templates to prevent link rot.

I have rewritten the text to align with Wikipedia's tone and guidelines, avoiding any appearance of automated content.

However, I’m currently unable to resubmit the draft, as the “Resubmit” option no longer appears.

Would you be willing to kindly reopen the submission so it can be reviewed again?

Many thanks for your time and help, — Atlasofage (talk) 07:19, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Selected sources for WP:THREE

These are the three best sources I've selected to establish notability. These sources are reliable per WP:RS/P:

• https://www.nationalgeographic.com/photography/article/looking-into-the-eyes-of-cubas-elderly-on-the-verge-of-change
• https://www.smh.com.au/culture/art-and-design/all-good-photography-is-a-self-portrait-says-oded-wagenstein-20200428-p54nwu.html
• https://www.bbc.com/news/in-pictures-45145151

There are more reliable sources cited in the article; I listed three of them here as WP:THREE only asks for three. Atlasofage (talk) 09:24, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Atlasofage,

Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest as the wife of the subject.

Given the conflict, the review of the page needs to be handled with care, mindful of the higher bar set by pages produced in circumstances of conflict of interest. Such pages typically may read too much like a promotional CV or advertorial, which Wikipedia is not; and/or contain prose that is not of a standard appropriate for an encyclopaedia (also see WP:PEACOCK and WP:NPV).

With the COI in mind, and the changes made since I last reviewed and declined the draft, I have reviewed the draft afresh, including considering the 3 sources you identify above in WP:THREE.

In my view the draft now meets the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO) and as such I am accepting it into mainspace. Please be mindful that despite your creation of the page, "All Wikipedia pages and articles are edited collaboratively by the Wikipedian community of volunteer contributors. no one, no matter what, has the right to act as if they are the owner of a particular article (or any part of it)": see WP:OWN. You are of course entitled to continue to edit the page but with this in mind. Finally, well done on patiently adjusting the draft following successive declines and feedback, it looks good now. Cabrils (talk) 21:46, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Dear @Cabrils, thank you so much for the review, and for the helpful links. I have read and understood them, and will ensure that my edits follow all of Wikipedia's guidelines. Once again, thank you very much. Atlasofage (talk) 09:48, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

@Atlasofage, Happy to have been of help. All the best. Cabrils (talk) 02:09, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Comments left by AfC reviewers

• Comment: Thank you for your helpful comments. I have addressed the concerns raised:
  * All direct URLs were replaced with properly formatted citations to prevent link rot.
  * Casual interviews were removed, retaining only notable mentions such as the authored column in The Washington Post and the interview in The Sydney Morning Herald, integrated into the relevant sections.
  * The awards included (e.g., POYi, POY Asia, Taylor Wessing) are internationally recognized and prestigious in the field of photography.
  * The entire draft was carefully reviewed and substantially rewritten to improve clarity, accuracy, and adherence to Wikipedia’s style guidelines.
  Thank you again for your consideration.

• Comment: Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO) but presently it is not clear that it does.
  As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. In short, "notability" requires reliable sources about the subject, rather than by the subject.
  The image used is identified as being @Atlasofage's "Own work" and the Wikimedia Foundation has received an e-mail confirming that the copyright holder has approved publication. As such, the author of this draft clearly knows the subject, or is the subject, of this draft and has a conflict of interest. Having any connection to the subject, including being the subject (see WP:AUTOBIO) or being paid, is considered a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link).
  Please note that many of the references would appear to be from sources that are NOT considered reliable for establishing notability and should be removed (including blogs, company websites, press releases, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, Spotify etc).
  Please note that many of the references are not formatted correctly (see Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor and Wikipedia’s Manual of Style for help).
  Additionally, the draft tends to read too much like a promotional CV or advertorial, which Wikipedia is not; and contains prose that is not of a standard appropriate for an encyclopaedia (also see WP:PEACOCK).
  Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page.
  It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the draft's talk page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject.
  It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:ANYBIO criteria #3, because XXXXX").
  Once you have implemented these suggestions, you may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page, including the name of the draft page, and I would be happy to reassess. Cabrils (talk) 03:58, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: Please stop using AI to communicate. Theroadislong (talk) 15:10, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: awards are not notable and interviews do not contribute to any notability. Theroadislong (talk) 14:58, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: Please don't use direct links as sources, since they're susceptible to link rot. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 01:23, 27 July 2025 (UTC)