Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Igor Ganikowskij

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. There seems to be a consensus that the article is clearly promotional in its current format, so I would be inclined to delete this as CSD G11. The article will require extensive reworking to fix this, but I am happy to userify it for anyone who wishes to undertake that work. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:35, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Igor Ganikowskij[edit]

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

Perhaps a notable artist, but in that case WP:NUKEANDPAVE applies because of the poor quality of the article (or should I say, CV). References are given for some of the extensive quotations, but they are unclear. Author should have awaited comments on their AfC submission. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 15:07, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unquestionably promotional. Deb (talk) 15:33, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete - Deeply flawed. No citations besides a URL leading to a personal website. Doesn't seem to be written from a NPOV at all, it reads basically like a resume. Breadblade (talk) 02:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A colossal mess of an article, for all of the reasons Breadblade mentioned... and probably a lot more.LM2000 (talk) 02:41, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve The painter is notable although the article seems to be a mess. I have added a couple of references from the article on Russian wiki (that seems to be better written) and removed a few eyesores although much more work is needed Alex Bakharev (talk) 03:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:15, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:15, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:15, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:16, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Currently the article is little more than an advert for the subject. Number 5 7 22:09, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. Perhaps userfy if the creator will speak up and promise to rework this. The article is a terrible, terrible mess, but the individual may be notable. Still, this cv/gibberish mess is hardly salvageable. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 22:41, 1 January 2014 (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.