Talk:Alona Rodeh

Keeps getting rejected
I don't see why this page keeps getting rejected. The subject has exhibited widely and has had significant coverage of her work, both in her home-country and internationally. There are thousands of artists who exhibited less and received less attention, with a wikipedia page. The editor insists that the subject lacks sufficient notoriety: according to which standard? It is enough to browse artists on wikipedia to see that the standard is murky at best!--B.Kislev (talk) 06:08, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , I understand that it's frustrating to see that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but to be honest, I'm put off by the blatant conflict of interest and the accumulation of seemingly minor issues like the external links to her galleries that I'm not very excited about working through 34 references and the finding that some are press releases, , announcements , mere mentions, , don't mention her at all . There are more than two articles that critically discuss and analyze her work. There is enough to pass the requirements of the WP:GNG. Clean up the sources, remove the promotion and it ought to pass. I'm disinclined to do this myself, due to the history of promotional efforts in the article. Vexations (talk) 14:11, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * ok, I took it upon myself to clean the page up. does it look better now? --B.Kislev (talk) 10:19, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , I did some more cleanup. Someone really needs to find the sources for the claim that her work is in museum collections; that will help to establish notability. Vexations (talk) 23:12, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I removed the section about museum collections. I don't think that's what's needed to establish notoriety: museums rarely announce the acquisition of work by younger artists, and it's a common practice for an artist to gift a work after a solo exhibition in an institution. It seems to me that her exhibition history and media coverage are more than enough to merit a Wikipedia page. I understand that there aren't clear, quantifiable guidelines for notoriety: but since art is exhibited publicly, exhibitions in venues that are (or can be considered) central or important should be enough to merit a page. --B.Kislev (talk) 07:00, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , The subject-specific notability guide for creative professionals is WP:NARTIST. I don't think it's very good, but it has been accepted by the community and having work in several (at least two) museum collections is an often used criterion when discussing notability at [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion]]. Some of the most important questions for an Articles for creation reviewer are: is the article neutral, and can it survive a discussion at Articles for deletion? Having references for museum collections would make a stronger case. I do think that the answer to those two questions is now yes, and I don't see any other reasons to decline. I will accept the article. Thank you for your contributions. Vexations (talk) 11:12, 29 December 2019 (UTC)