Talk:Max Vadukul

message: (1) Move aside Avedon, Penn, etc. etc: this article makes Vadukul sound like an utterly amazing photographer.
(2) I notice that with the exception of a single small edit by User:128.61.98.24, every addition of content to this article has been made by User:66.65.158.132 (contributions), User:Pr61 (contributions), or User:Maxvadukul (contributions), each of whom seems (from his or her list of contributions) to be exclusively interested in Max Vadakul.
I trust that (1) and (2) are not related. -- Hoary 07:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A wizard, a true star

message: Anon editors, please, rather than vandalize what you diagree with, work on fixing it.  If a statement is tagged "citation needed", and you don't agree with it, then just remove it rather than making up a citation.  Such removals are not vandalism; made-up citations are. Dicklyon 22:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Anon vandalism

message: Tyrenius has done a good job here and I'm reluctant to criticize it. However, some claims for MV's career are sourced from MV's own website. This is poor. (That the site is unusable without Flash is the, er, whatever's the opposite of icing on the cake.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: After notability has been established I think it's ok to cite the odd bit from a subject's own website but I never cite content which has been rendered in flash. Gwen Gale (talk) 08:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sourcing

message: I would like to submit Trunk Archive as an external link. Trunk Archive is an image licensing agency which represents his photography archives. Where there is a link to his assignment agency and personal website, I believe it is appropriate and necessary to add Trunk Archive who handles his photos in syndication, and also serves as a more comprehensive gallery to his body of work. 
There is a log-in for users that set up an account, but also a general view to the public that requires no log-in at all accessible through "view archive". Thank you. 74.8.187.218 (talk) 16:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add External Link 

message: A recent edit summary tells us:
:I am Max Vadukul's Studio Manager. We both agreed his page made his career appear limited to the various subcategories that existed under the Career section. I have updated with edited writing by his son, a New York Times writer.
Candor appreciated.
Here's one, randomly selected nugget among the new additions:
:Max Vadukul has long standing relationships with The New Yorker, French Vogue, Italian Vogue, L'Uomo Vogue, W Magazine, Interview, and Rolling Stone. He shoots regularly for T: The New York Times Style Magazine, Esquire, Vogue China, Egoiste, Town & Country, and others. His book, "MAX," published in 2000 by Nicholas Callaway, came out the same year as Helmut Newton's "Sumo," helping start the trend of oversized large-format photography books.
Let's look at this in detail:
*has long standing relationships with: Does this mean "provides editorial photography for", and if not, what does it mean?
*Whatever it means, where's the evidence for it?
*He shoots regularly for: Putting aside what "regularly" means -- every issue? once a year or so? -- does this imply that work for the New Yorker etc is irregular?
*Where's the evidence for it?
*Which "trend of oversized large-format photography books" is this? (Photobooks gradually increased in size from around 1970 until quite recently, but I wasn't aware of any particular trend. Yes, I had noticed that Taschen went through a phase of putting out vast books, most of which were not of photography -- a random example: Diego Rivera: The Complete Murals. As for huge and highly regarded photobooks, how about Ismo Hölttö's People in the Lead Role [1991] and James Nachtwey's Inferno [1999]?) If there is reliable evidence for such a trend, where is the reliable evidence that Max helped start this?
As for this "edited writing by his son, a New York Times writer", I note that the son too will have a conflict of interest; and I wonder who owns the copyright to his writing, and whether this accords with the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. 
Who is going to strip the promotional fluff from this article and provide independent, reliable sources for the factual assertions? -- Hoary (talk) 23:32, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Conflict of interest

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Max Vadukul. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140814181016/http://212gallery.com/artists/vadukul/works.html to http://www.212gallery.com/artists/vadukul/works.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Haven't looked at any. They might be sources. They might not but they certainly don't belong as part of a massive external link section
* Yohji's Man In Black & White: Max Vadukul
* Esquire Magazine: Brad Pitt Story
* W Magazine: Soul Sisters by Max Vadukul
* NYTimes: Ai Weiwei's Photo Shoot from China with Max Vadukul
* Vanity Fair: In The Details, April 2014
* Kolkata, India's Cultural Bedrock by Max Vadukul
* Who Shot Rock & Roll Exhibition, Brooklyn Museum
* Who Shot Rock & Roll Exhibition, Brooklyn Museum
* The Self Portrait: National Geographic Channel (2000)
* Max Vadukul's Kinetic Force: The New Yorker 
* The Guardian: Photographer Max Vadukul's Best Shot Slywriter (talk) 06:58, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links pruned