Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anatole Krasnyansky

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:37, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Anatole Krasnyansky[edit]

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

The article is an advert, without third-party reliable sources. Though it was claimed in 2008 that Anatole Krasnyansky "is a widely-known and collected artist," there does not seem much to substantiate this. A search on Google gives 217 hits when you go to the last page. Most of these hits are from people trying to sell his artwork. The rest are for a different possibly more-notable artist of the same name who lived 1924-2004. Toddy1 (talk) 13:52, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Are you sure that you are referring to two different artists? Because I believe they are the same person and this should be a Speedy Keep. --MurderByDeadcopy^"bang!" 16:29, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Un-bold 'speedy keep' editor made a 'keep' !vote below. Jbh ^Talk 15:23, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:55, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:55, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is very difficult to be sure of anything with non-notable artists.

Anatole Krasnyansky is claimed by "Invaluable" (an auction house) to have been born in 1930 and still be alive.
Anatole Krasnyansky is claimed by Palm Beach Fine Art to have lived 1924-2004.

The style of art is identical, so it is possible that they are the same person; or that the art galleries have muddled two different artists. I have no idea. But if either of them were notable, there ought to be reliable sources other than companies trying to sell his products. So where is the coverage in reliable sources? Wikipedia:Notability says: "Information on Wikipedia must be verifiable; if no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article." The subject of the article appears to fail this test. However, if you know different, please provide sources and put them in the article.-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is not a single RS pertaining to the subject.Lute88 (talk) 17:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 17:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 17:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 17:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I find a lot of passing mentions of his work but nothing about him. I will look in some of my old art books to see if I can find anything on him. None of his works are on WikiArt for whatever that is worth. Jbh ^Talk 17:25, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Useless. I have a few compendia of Ukrainian painters. There is nothing.Lute88 (talk) 17:33, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't they be more likely to listed under Russian and not Ukrainian since they left in 1975? --MurderByDeadcopy^"bang!" 18:29, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing of the sort either. Moreover, the article had claims of film credits which were credited to entirely different people on IMDB.Lute88 (talk) 18:32, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is IMDB considered to be a reliable source? Moreover your book is Ukrainian painters. --MurderByDeadcopy^"bang!" 18:51, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no SOVIET painter by that name either. The cyrillic search produces nothing at all. As to IMD, it is reliable for production credits. The article had patently false claims of AK's film credits.Lute88 (talk) 18:57, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can find nothing that passes muster. Fails WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE Jbh ^Talk 18:17, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is this a mix-up with a dad/son? Is one the surreal painter and the other one a scenic artist? Someone made a book of their work and gave that to the Hermitage. --MurderByDeadcopy^"bang!" 19:44, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Nope. There is only one, and a search in Ukrainian brings nothing at all - [1]

Same in Russian - [2]

Lute88 (talk) 03:33, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Toddy1: Just wondering: why was it me who was notified of the article's being nominated for deletion? My only edit to the page was nominating it for speedy deletion, and that was more than seven years ago. I didn't create the page. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I notified the first two people to make edits to the article.-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:32, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Krasnyansky is listed in the book, Ukrainian Art: Shevchenko National Prize[3]. He was featured with Chagall[4]. In an art fraud case, his name gets mentioned along with Dali, Rembrandt, Erte, and Max.[5] Also, his serigraphs are valued super high ($2,350)[6] for a "nobody"! Also, another one for $10,000[7], a write up in the Malibu Chronicle [8] AND the is no one named Anatole Kranyansky with the birth date of 1924-2008. That info is a false lead to this AfD. --MurderByDeadcopy^"bang!" 09:30, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Adding it's high for a serigraph, ie a mass limited edition silkscreen print. And Lute88 appears to only have some issue with him because Krasnyansky is being classified as Ukrainian. --MurderByDeadcopy^"bang!" 18:01, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPA. Secondly - the Barneby is an ESTIMATE, not a record of sale for that price. And there is no indication the item has ever had a bidder.--Lute88 (talk) 13:26, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the proper characterization of Lute88's "issue" is "There is not a single RS pertaining to the subject.". Trying to discount another editor's opinion on nationalist grounds is more than a bit distasteful and you should consider ~~striking~~ that accusation. There is no need for comments like that here. Jbh ^Talk 18:37, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No. I pointed that out for full transparency. And, to be fair, they are not the only ones here with that bias. I'm already aware of exactly what you are going to with this article, right or wrong! --MurderByDeadcopy^"bang!" 19:41, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not aware of any bias here, and your inference thereof is insulting.Lute88 (talk) 02:49, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- He is not featured in that book. He is listed in keywords that contain a lot of people and entities that are not the recipients of the prize.Lute88 (talk) 14:46, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And he is not on the list of recipients - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Shevchenko_National_Prize_laureates. And you missed this tidbit: "Please note that the content of this book primarily consists of articles available from Wikipedia or other free sources online.")))Lute88 (talk) 15:07, 2 November 2015 (UTC)Lute88 (talk) 14:50, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)The source you site to say he is " mentioned along with Dali, Rembrandt, Erte, and Max." says simply "two by Ukrainian-American artist Anatole Krasnyansky" which means nothing. Where and how is he mentioned in Ukrainian Art: Shevchenko National Prize the only thing that link says is the two words of his name exist somewhere in that book, no context and not even necessarily occurring together. I do not know where you get "featured with Chagall" from, the book you link is a gallery index. These arguments are even weaker than WP:NOTINHERITED maybe WP:NOTMENTIONEDINTHESAMESENTENCE. Also $2,230 is not "super high" it is 'peanuts' if you are trying to claim he is anywhere near Dali, Rembrandt, Erte, Max and Chagall. I am rather impressed in how you framed a 'passing mention' in one article and two Google Books returns, without any text, to make this guy seem to be a 'great artist' but he is not. If he were there would be something on him somewhere. Imaginative framing does not demonstrate notability.

I have collapsed the super long url's above by enclosing them in '[]'. Jbh ^Talk 15:03, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That "book" is wiki-derived.Lute88 (talk) 15:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citogenesis. Jbh ^Talk 15:27, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, again, Jbhunley, ironic that the editors of that article choose to use three refs and a wikilink to "prove" that Randall Munroe coined the term "citogenesis".

Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 21:34, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 17:19, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as stub - Highbeam.com lists six articles about Krasnyansky. The article is poorly written but we can fix it using paywalled references. The Wikipedia Library is going to open up a few more paywalls for me within the next couple of weeks. It is premature to delete this article without doing WP:ATD and WP:BEFORE first. These are POLICIES that are NOT optional. JSTOR.com has nothing. Roll up your sleeves, apply for some paywall databases and start recovering articles instead of deleting them. Put this one on the back burner until then, or withdraw the deletion nomination as should be. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 21:24, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Of the articles listed on highbeam.com three are about a case of fraud and theft involving his paintings. One is advertising an auction. Another is about someone buying at a sale of art. I am not sure what the one from the Rocky Mountain News is about. None of them are about Anatole Krasnyansky.-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:36, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @Checkingfax: You did notice that of those six Highbeam hits three only said two of his paintings were part of a fraud case and nothing more, one says a piece was "valued at $2,350" and nothing more, one is a one line comment from someone who bought a painting at an auction and one says "Two of his favorite pieces of art are colorful, surrealistic paintings by Anatole Krasnyansky, a Russian artist who lives in the United States." [9] and nothing more. Right? Nothing more than four passing mentions in six articles. I would suggest you do a BEFORE that consists of more than counting 'hits' before you scold others about their research. Just say'n. Cheers. Jbh ^Talk 21:46, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The flow is: notice article >>> try to fix it >>> if unfixable then nominate for deletion. Starting with AfD and then trying to fix it is against POLICY. We are supposed to reference POLICY only in our discussions here.

Now that the article is improperly in the AfD queue it puts an unreasonable deadline on trying to fix the article. I need about three weeks to try to bring this article up to better standards. In the meantime, I suggest all editors get over to TWL and apply for some paywall database access codes, and that the nominating editor withdraw this nomination. The fact that artists could counterfeit his work and make money suggests he is a notable artist in the league of the other few artists that were also copied. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:05, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On what do you base your claim that artists counterfeited his work? In the fraud case, someone claimed that the paintings were stolen and then tried to sell them.-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:41, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:46, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Searches of the usual Google types, HighBeam, newspapers.com, newspaperarchive.com, EBSCO, and ProQuest turned up only brief mentions in the routine course of business (e.g. "Also included in the auction will be works by Anatole Krasnyansky"). Significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources has not been found, so does not meet WP:ARTIST or WP:BASIC. No objection to draftify/userfication if Checkingfax thinks they can rescue the topic, but it's been tagged for notability off and on ever since it was created in 2008 (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008 Archive Jul 2#Park West Gallery: our article vs. The New York Times.27 makes interesting reading); so far no one has found the requisite sources. Worldbruce (talk) 09:07, 12 November 2015 (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.