Andrey Shishkin: No notability, no significant achievements, no reliable art criticism.  Cross-wiki spam.  Andrei Romanenko ( talk ) 18:56, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Russia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  The article seems to cite reliable sources (academic articles), but I can't be bothered to go through the steps needed to machine translate PDFS (hence, comment, not a vote).  However, source analysis is necessary to prove that notability is not given here - the nom makes such a claim but does not provide analysis of sources.  It may also be worthwhile to check concurrent discussion at ru:Википедия:К_удалению/14_мая_2024#Шишкин,_Андрей_Алексеевич .  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 01:36, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] These sources are not academic in the full sense of the word.  They are published in the collections of articles everybody can submit for a a small amount of money, their only author is a local schoolteacher, not an expert in art (this was the main reason for deletion in Russian wikipedia).  Not a single art institution knows this painter, no exhibitions, no art criticism.  Andrei Romanenko ( talk ) 10:27, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  What is a non-self-proclaimed painter?  Is it when someone is actually not a painter, but is called such by someone's else?  Isn't that called hoax then?  Wojsław Brożyna ( talk ) 22:51, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Non-self-proclaimed painter is the painter whose works are in museums and acclaimed galleries, reviewed with art critics and art historians, published in esteemed editions.  Wikipedia is for collecting information about this kind of authors.  This is what the criteria of notability are about.  Andrei Romanenko ( talk ) 10:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This is a recognized painter.  It has nothing to do with self-proclaiming.  Wojsław Brożyna ( talk ) 19:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  02:39, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] AGAINST Ты что, коммунист?  что с тобой не так ?? ?  << самопровозглашенный художник >> не можешь терпеть приличное искусство, настоящее, душевное искусство?  ахуенный ... 98.240.113.219 ( talk ) 22:08, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting again due to lack of civil participation.  This article seems to be about a painter but the discussion is more charged than one would expect for a borderline notable painter so I'm guessing there is more involved with his reputation than their artistic skills.  A reminder, this is the English Wikipedia, please offer your opinions in English.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  03:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] very sorry sir just  his name is russian i wanted to reply like this i found it to be more pertinent romanenko's remarks are laced with vitriol below the surface and betray a certain negative attitude, which he also expressed on ruwiki, where he was unfortunately successful in having the corresponding article deleted @ Андрей Романенко tell me that over four hundred paintings like this and reference to your work in scholarly papers is not a 'significant achievement' how can you call him a 'self-proclaimed painter' looking at the exemplars of his work ?? ?  i have seen on the english-speaking internet several memes using his painting Благословение ратника this one for example https://ifunny.co/picture/how-it-feels-to-inherit-the-family-suicide-revolver-aUDIhr0PA they're hard to find by searching, because of course the name and author of the painting are not provided more professional websites where his work is posted https://www.rbth.com/arts/335686-ancient-east-slavs-art https://www.indcatholicnews.com/news/41202 https://christian.art/daily-gospel-reading/luke-2-22-40-2020/ the followers of the rabbi yeshua really like his admittedly charming depiction by the avowed pagan shishkin some private blogs https://www.livemaster.com/topic/2998743-legends-and-stories-of-the-artist-andrey-shishkin https://art-in-eastern-europe.blogspot.com/2016/09/andrey-shishkin.html not enough criticism for you ?  tell me again how he is a 'self-proclaimed painter' have you painted a wall ?  98.240.113.219 ( talk ) 03:34, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The fact that someone's pictures are available in the Web at different obscure websites does not make their authors notable, neither does being mentioned in nobody knows whose blogs.  No exhibtions in any known galleries, no works in museums, no art criticism in any known editions, no catalogues, no prizes, no place in professional art community, zero level of notability.  Andrei Romanenko ( talk ) 10:34, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] We have already in the article sources from academic journals.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Creative_professionals This guideline applies to authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals.  Such a person is notable if: The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors; or The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique; or The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work.  In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series); or The person's work (or works) has:  (a) become a significant monument,  (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition,  (c) won significant critical attention, or  (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.  Shishkin is one of the leading figures in pagan / Slavic fantasy art in Russia, a collective body of work, and he is prominently featured in these papers, which are cited in the article.  So does he not meet the third criterion ?  98.240.113.219 ( talk ) 21:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Writings of a local schoolteacher published in insignificant editions where authors themselves are paying for publication (see here for instance) are not qualified to determine whether the painter played a major role in anyhting or not.  However, the author (A. Gizbrecht) does not claim anything about Shishkin at all, he just briefly mentions several of his paintings.  Andrei Romanenko ( talk ) 17:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Were the authors "local schoolteachers" or not?  And you must know that every scientific paper charges some fee to publish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_processing_charge 98.240.113.219 ( talk ) 18:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Many good journals do not have apc.  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 01:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I am not finding significant, reliable coverage for the subject.  Fails WP:ARTIST .  I am not finding indications he is in any collections, or been part of any significant exhibitions.  Reading what I can of the articles, it appears the references are more about the subject of paganism in art than in discussions of Shishkin's work, with the exception of Art-Vernissage, which is selling his art.  An alternative might be to redirect to Russian Rodnover fine arts , but I don't see what information could be added to that article.  The artist exists and paints.  The biographical info was extracted from a Non-RS sale site.  -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 00:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] AGAINST The editor above (WomenArtistUpdates) is clearly biased against this article.  She's part of the "Women in Red" wikiproject, which aims to change the percentage of biographical articles about men and women to "reduce systemic bias".  It's obviously in her interest to reduce the number of biographical articles about men to make her "job" easier.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.64.55.216 ( talk • contribs ) What a ridiculous claim.  Aside from the personal attack, there are far too many biographies for this to make a dent in any way.  Geschichte ( talk ) 21:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That wasn't a personal attack, just an observation.  Delete Nothing in the article or the referenced sources suggests this meets WP:ARTIST at this time.  Elspea756 ( talk ) 14:17, 4 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] kindly read my above comment with reference to the pertinent notability guideline 98.240.113.219 ( talk ) 21:02, 4 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete