Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mikhail Tsaturian

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mikhail Tsaturian[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This semi-promotional article on an artist does not meet criteria for notability per WP:GNG nor WP:NARTIST. The sourcing is very weak, and most sources do not mention him at all or fail verification with the exception of one that mentions an NFT he made, and another which is a sponsored project he did for an alcoholic beverage company. A BEFORE search using his name as well as his pseudonym only reveals social media and user-submitted content. No evidence of important exhibitions at museums or national galleries, no museum collections. Possibly TOOSOON? Netherzone (talk) 23:26, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Visual arts, Technology, and Russia. Netherzone (talk) 23:26, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nominator makes a strong case. I am not finding any usable references to show the subject's notability. WP:TOOSOON. - WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:04, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree entirely, the existing sourcing is poor and I can't find any better sources supporting notability. JaggedHamster (talk) 15:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:43, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I just deleted this article on the Russian-language Wikipedia. I could not find weighty art awards and prizes, no quality independent reviews of his work, and no reviews of his creative path. --Khinkali (talk) 15:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article infobox contains a link to his site which is cited as a source for many claims in the article body. The site itself is offline (whois reports it as not being registered). Internet Archive does have a copy of the site from 2022, which gives an impression of a freelance designer who also occasionally displays his works at places without any curation, likely to promote his professional services. The the article mentions a few works, but none of them appears to have any third-party coverage at all. Anton.bersh (talk) 10:37, 2 July 2023 (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.