Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Gabrichidze

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gabrichidze (talk | contribs) at 10:43, 21 June 2005. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Nick Gabrichidze

-The text posted here by "Ell" at 17/06 6:37 was moved to the project descussion page ( Wikipedia talk:Votes for deletion/Nick Gabrichidze )because one person can vote only once. But thanx for contibution dear Ell :) The original vote is placed at the bottom of the page(if somebody alse will vote please do so there)-

del. self-promotion, original research, nonverifiable, nonnotable. Of google hits, vast majority are online catalogs of art and gabrishidze's signatures in posts. Not a single external reference. Self-promotion is also spammed across several articles, embedded, I admit, into serious contributions. But still sucks. mikka (t) 20:05, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Google can obvoiusely display only the "on-line" material including catalogs so this claim isn't relevant; however Google shows significant presense of tis atists works in the different collections and popular data base, which makes it iteresting for wikipedia users
    • Impotant note To solve the verifability problem the date of publication which is mentioned in the artickle is corrected. Correct date is: "Het Parool", 25 July 1998, page 2. Our apologies for inconvinience and many thanks for mikkalai for notice

Autors: 1:26 am, Amsterdam time, 14 June 2005

This note was inserted into the body progressing discussion. For details of dicussion please see below:


The availablity of artists works in different catalogs is in fact proof of emerging popularity.
most cathalogs shown both in Google and Yahoo do not have gabrichidze'ssignature.
The activity of Nick Gabrichidze as significant on-line journalist is of course reflected with a significant number of on-line publications which yo have noticed
(Unsigned edit by Jumber (talk · contribs))
who is Jumber, and what makes you think his point is invalid?
I am very active online. But until someone else writes an article about me, I am not going to land into wikipedia. mikka (t) 00:13, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • As a matter of fact you have a page here, with a photo of your own self, links to your articles and image of the Bolshevik star you have earned in your youth. You do not reveal your real name but its your own business after all. You don’t do it, Nick Gabrichidze does.. So? If the current position of Nick Gabrichidze page is frustrating for you it can be simply relocated as his user page: still it will be linked to surrealism, (most editors there seem to like his work), necessary political threads and pop art, so people would keep coming..
      • It is your business, but not a valid point. First of all we are not sure if Gabrichidze actually wrote the article himself, or posted it himself. It could be a text written by some Gabrichidze-friendly critic ( jumber ?), or some gallery which has his exhibition coming. Besides even if he did, it is normal; even if it is not common in wikipedia technically speaking.. Possibly you are not familiar with an art world. Most galleries ask artists to write artists statements themselves, so what you see later in the newspaper as a "critical article" is mostly work of the artists themselves; unless press wants to bury their carriers of course. Besides Gabrichidze is listed as surrealist and aggressive self-promotion is a trade mark of surrealism, particularly of Salvador Dali. Note:typos corrected. Autors 2:47 Amsterdam time, 14/07/2005
  • Delete Surely they can get a better photo for one who "is still the mater of political controversy"! Sonic Mew 20:31, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Jinkleberries 20:31, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Note: Junkleberries is a new account today and voted 'keep' on 37 articles within a 7-minute period. This user also received a vandalism warning today. Tobycat 21:07, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • There is no need to discuse a personalities unless they violating a code of conduct at this particular discussion (Unsigned edit by Jumber (talk · contribs))'
  • Keep There ARE external refernces (such as expatica link, plus peference to the "Het Parool"(verifiable in any libruary). Big number of reference would make artickle look like a resume I guess. No proof of self-promotion but the articke could be a contribution by one of the art agensies who work with this particular artist, which is indeed acceptable for active artist. Jumber 23:45, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • A new account. mikka (t) 00:49, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete vanity. JamesBurns 04:42, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete nn vanity. --Xcali 04:46, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep The great Russian writer Bulgakov once wrote:

"To see that Dostoevsky is a great writer one should not ask for his reference. Seeing one of his books would be enough"

Same applies for artists. I enjoyed seeing his artwork here Lola pianola 11 : 09, 13 Jun (UTC)

- user's first and second edits on Wikipedia are to this VFD page.

  • Delete - non-notable. --FCYTravis 10:12, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Notable. It is an article about the un-official, so called underground activity: both in the fields of journalism and arts. Even in his choise of politics. Either we remove articles regarding alternative forms of journalism, arts and politics(I mean graffiti, murals, Online journalism or accept the fact that Gabrichidze is indeed the most notable representative of that sector of society. Please remeber that number of coorporate serch engine hits or amount of headlines aren't neccesarily the sighn of significance. Kaji1 14 : 08, 13 Jun (UTC)
  • Keep Art is not the same as let's say MTV when you discuss how notable the artist is. Self-promotion? Maybe but artists who is not self-promoting himself should consider retirement. If we remove him we should remove Keith Haring too Erin23 3 : 07 pm, 13 June (UTC)
  • Keep Keith Haring is already dead. It's known that artists should die first to get recognition. Let's make an exception and keep this page:)Pop culture highway 15:36, 13 June
    • Comment: Whoever closes this vote should note that the last three users all did their first edits after this article was nominated for VfD and somehow mysteriously all found their way to this vote. Also note that the subject of this article has been added to several legitmate art articles including Art deco and Surrealism. DS1953 14:45, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • So what's your point?
        • If you will check surrealism page you will see that the image of "Chess revolution"(good work don't you think) .
          Chess revolution
          was added by the author of the same article we have to WfD here; but the link from painting directly to this article was created by User:Sparkit who is a long time wiki editor

If you ask me image belongs there; there is nothing more surrealist then that piece in contemporary art(my personal opinion). Pity if we will remove it because the artists "official status" does not satisfy some ones pedantism

If you ask me, my 12-year old daughter may do better than this piece of pretentious daub. mikka (t) 15:31, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
        • Congratulations! Your daughter is really talented then, no kidding. Of course it is too early to allow her to open even user account here, but you must have already set some on-line photo album or even website with her paintings. Can I see it? I am really interested. I know some gallery owners who exhibit prodigy kids, so may be I would even arrange an exposition… Can you please post a link here?
  • Delete - not notable. DS1953 14:45, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • With all due respect to your opinion can you spare some more minutes of your valuable time to explain us your point of view in details? Thanks in advance.
  • Keep Obviously artists and also scientists do not make headlines everyday. If we will begin removing people because they have not enough hits in the corporate websites and traditional media, soon wiki will have only the MTV stars and top politicians left Punkpunk 17:37, 13 Jun 2005
    Not obviously. Notable artists and scientists do make headlines. We don't have articles about each and every professor in the world. They are normal people, who do their noral job. The guy that owns pizza hut across my office is just as deserving as Bush before the face of God. Biu obviously there is some difference betwen them. Another reson is verifiability of information about him. I don't believe a single word of the wikipedia article how good he is, unless a solid reference is provided. I am tired to explain this at every VfD. mikka (t) 15:29, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep For an living artist he made a tremendous achievement. There is no point to wait for official monography to come out, it does not happen until 50 years of artist's demise usually. If his works are present in the catalogs plus are available publicly as a murals then keep it. There are references and catalogs available at search engines(not only Google) plus many images from his websites. I checked it, and I have visited some of this artists display's before, particularly in Amsterdam’s public library in April-may 2002, very interesting if you ask me. I think his images are also available as posters(I recognize it) in my area(I live in Europe now, but I have seen it even in Venice, California I guess). For a university professor it wouldn’t be enough, but for the artist-more then enough.

And please, mikka do not take issue with deletion of this page so much to the heart. It is just an art page, matter of taste after all. If people like his art he will be considered(if is not already considered) great, if people will like it not then... Besides unless someone will prove the opposite, there is no grounds to claim plagiarism. For the lovers of “conspiracy theories”: I registered purely to defend nick. I do not know the artist personally, but have seen his displays and murals, and I am in the mailing list of one of galleries which works with Nick. I was actually informed by them through email that now Nick has a wikipedia page, came here to check it out and found out that page it marked for deletion (I guess if Nick will keep up his good work I will create a new page for this artist myself, even if this one will be deleted). I opened an account to edit this page, but in a meanwhile I found out that page of other Amsterdam’s cultural phenomena, the Boom Chicago theater is inaccurate too, so I edited it as well. I hope the fact that I am fun of Nick Gabrichidze’s art does not disqualify my vote. I believe that when coming to art, music or love only cyborgs are neutral.PeterPan1 19:29, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I am not. I am a proud Bureaucratic Fuck. I have nothing personal against Nick, nor against the authors of his article. But there are certain wikipedia rules. And I am taking to the heart the thing described by a Russian proverb: "You cannot do this... but if you want it very much, then you can". Well, let us see what if it will prevail. It is people who make rules, after all. mikka (t) 18:47, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Okay Mr. Buraucratic Fuck, we have to leave soon but we are still online. So when we will leave,can you please post your future comments not in the middle of people's posts, but AFTER their sgnature?
"You cannot do this... but if you want it very much, then you can". Well, let us see what if it will prevail"
If you ask me that should ALLWAYS PREVAIL if we want to make World a better place? Don't you agree? Thanx for a great slogan I will put it on my T-shirt.:):)
You may, acording to Wikipedia:copyrights and GFDL "provided that this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies to the Document are reproduced in all copies". But the original Russian say, which goes "If forbidden, but you want it very much, then allowed", is copyright-free, according to the current copyright law of the Russian Federation, which excludes "works of folk creativity" from copyright. mikka (t) 19:36, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep To be honest I am writing this sitting next to Peter, and using same PC, so in theory you may consider our vote "one vote", but I am different person, so I think it would be fair to count two. It's up to you of course. Anyway, I am professional model, my name is also Erin (there are some other Erin’s here, among Nick Gabrichidze “fun-club” I see, can I send you an email?)

This is my first post at wikipedia but I hope to find some time to edit modeling, and also "cat walk" section.. Unlike Peter I DO know Nick Gabrichidze personally; I was honored to be his model for a while (See my profile please). I am a one who introduced Peter to Nick's artwork, and projects. Anyway I guess it makes my vote even less valuable, but from another hand if there is a discussion about keeping a university professor at the wikipedia, then his students would vote "yes" or "no" I guess.. So why can’t model vote for the artist she worked with? I have visited most museums in europe,and beleive me, seeing the original works of great masters makes same impact as seeing the original work of Nick Gabrichidze. HIS WORK IS GREAT. I know my statement is purely emotional, there is no logic in it; so I do not want to argue about it, but I have a right to say my opinion here as far as I understand, so I use this right. And to get some proof that Nick does what he does, best thing to do for you mikka would be to see it by your own eyes. Te next public project by Nick Gabrichidze will be changing an interior of Holland Casino in Amsterdam, opening is at July 28 here is a link [1]. You are welcome to show up. Nick will be at the opening himself, you can introduce yourself to him and I am sure you will get a free drink and will enjoy rest of the evening and both show and paintings..Knutson

  • One last comment from Knutson and Peter I disagree with mikka but at least he has enough respect for users to make his point clear and argue for it. So could other guys who vote for "delete" spare some of heir time and present us with some arguments? I am sure they can find some, after all Nick isn’t Da Vinci,;) yet.. It’s just so arrogant to post one word like "irrelevant" or "vanity" and go away.
  • Delete, no evidence of notability. --W(t) 19:08, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC)
  • Keep My private opinion: thinking that request for VfD from mikka is little biased in that case judging by his actions the discussion about same person at another thread. I am ethnic Caucasian(Azeri )myself and I am shocked how deep the hostility goes sometimes(i mean the other thread not here). I checked many articles about other artists and found even less sources of notability; as matter of fact this has much more then 75% of artists. I wonder if the user who started this thread would ever have such a big interest in fine arts if not Mr. Gabrichidze's mention regarding caucasophobia; would be interesting to see how frequently mikka is participating in editing art pages.. Everybody has a right to put a deletion request at this board as far as I understood, but I guess to give ones self this right, this person should have at least some professional competence in the matter. I would not give myself a right to request the deletion of pages about microbiology because I am not a microbiologist. And the fact that one user has put two pages regarding the same person for deletion within less then few days; from those two at least one(not this one but another, about politics, the caucasophobia one) with no grounds at all, gives away serious level of prejudice. But could be I am wrong. I am not going to argue about it here anyway, I just wrote my opinion once. The request for deletion is biased.I do not know how good is Mr. Gabrichidze as an artist though, I am not an art critic. He makes lot of hits at search engines but for me it is not an illustration of anything. But until someone will come out with some competent comment about his art, not “my daughter can do better” I will stand for "keep him here". I am new user I know. I came simply from caucasophobia link, where I participate. Musavatist 11:51, 2005 Jun 13
    Gues what, I came from caucasophobia link as well. And it just happened that we have different opinions about both articles. Your attitude to my opinion exactly of the kind that is expressed in the caucaso article: if I am against a Caucasian, then I am a biased and hostile caucasophob. Nevertheless, I am repeating personally to you again: the probliem is not in Nick, but in the article. It is not based on a published opinion of an expert (I don't have to be an expert in microbiology to see that), but someone's personal essay. Allah akbar! 23:28, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Note:Please discuss the artickle about caucasophobia at this link Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Caucasophobia Autors

  • Delete - this guy or a friend is becoming a pest by vandalising articles with self promotion material. -- Solipsist 21:58, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The important update regarding verifability of this artckle was made. Please see the note above marked as important note

Please check the new information before voting Autors; 1 : 39 am Amsterdam time; 14 June 2005

Note: Most of the galleries, funs, journalists and art collectors associated with Nick Gabrichidze received the invitation to visit (and edit) Nick Gabrichidze at wikipedia then the page was created. After the article was put for VfD, many members of Nick Gabrichidze related mailing lists have received an invitation to cast he vote here at this thread; and also to contribute for other sections of wikipedia of course. Since the mistake with verifabity was corrected yesterday, the original dispute seems to be solved and page seems to be improved enough to stay ( it is not upon us to decide though ). However if some of the people who already received an invitation to participate in the discussion still want to cast the vote, then please do so below. We are always interested what is the public opinion about Nick Gabrichidze ’ s art and what can be improved. Even if you vote “Delete”; it’s a free encyclopedia after all... However we kindly request to motivate your vote with more then one word. Autors; 2:03 pm Amsterdam time; 14 June 2005


  • Keep I guess the problem is already solved but I still want to cast my vote as long I am here.I live in Europe and I am an art lover, so defenetely know Nick Gabrichidze's art.But I am not surprised that many people outside Europe do not know him, because art is not well promoted by coorporate media..Anyway I think the people who complain about notability have a point. "Autors"(authors) of this artickle should put some more articles about Nick from mainstream European media here to close all arguments against him. I hope (I am sure) there are some available. Evelina 18:25 June 14 2005 (UTC)

This flock of new editors suddenly popped up from out of nowhere just to vote for their(?) beloved artist looks extremely suspicious for Astroturfing mikka (t) 17:10, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Note:Mikkalai you are not about conspiracy theory, aren't you? Anyway please carefully read the note above (2:03pm Amsterdam time) which may help you to destroy your worries or at least to reduce the level of your suspiciousness.. After all your commitment to destroy this article also does not look very healthy to us, but as we have said it's free encyclopedia. Authors, 7:47 pm,Amsterdam, 14/07/2005

Note Actually, one can find an element of astroturfing here as amatter of fact,but I doubt it is possible to make any step forward in arts, politics or journalism without p/r campaign now days(or philosophically seeing may be it was like that ever and always). Could be in that the difference between George Bush and pizza guy around the corner(your post from 15:29, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ) is that Bush had done astroturfing and pizza guy has not (another difference is that pizza guy is doing something actually useful: joke). But from another hand you admitted yourself that previously you had no big interest in arts and entertainment and came here purely out of frustration with our little "caucasophobia" dispute(23:28, 13 Jun 2005 ), so living in the glass house.. Anyway there are nice discussion boards(may be you can suggest some) where we can discuss the importance and consequence of astrotufing in politics, arts and culture; and difference between science and arts in that matter, but let's not start philosophical dispute here OK?. Authors, 8:03 pm, 14/07/2005 Amsterdam Typo's corrected 8:06

  • Delete. Notability not established. I also deleted Nick Gabrichidze from among the noted artists and designers list in the art deco article. The photo of his painting in the surrealism article should also be removed; are Gabrichidze's supporters really maintaining that he is among the most important surrealists? carmeld1 00:38, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Note: Wikipedia does not yet have a User page called Carmeld1 (just for the record)Authors; 11:30, 15/07/2005 Amsterdam

  • Delete, nn, sock puppet breach. RickK 23:11, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

-Beleive it or not, it is not sock puppet breach. But some "keep" votes(especially recent) are so poorely edited that VfD page would bebeter of without them..


"The photo of his painting in the surrealism article should also be removed; are Gabrichidze's supporters really maintaining that he is among the most important surrealists?" We believe that this particular work is. Art is a mater of opinion. Your is taken into the consideration but please respect other people’s opinion too..Authors; 11:30, 15/07/2005 Amsterdam

  • Delete, self-promotion. I checked Lexis-Nexis for his name and it is not referenced even once in a single US news source; checking European sources there was one article that mentioned him, however. I'm not sure if it's enough to merit a wikipedia entry. My advice - Nick, wait until more articles are published about you and then someone else decides it is notable enough to include in wikipedia. --csloat 21:28, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Important note regarding notability

To solve the notability issue here is a list some media responses which are currently available to us:

Article in the Dutch artistic weekly BBK krant “Kuns of decoratie” by Nico Klaus (N229, sept 1997)

Article in “Het Parool”(see Nick Gabrichidze)

Article in “The Journal”, Newcasle “Why Nck has Newcasle not Georgia, onhis mind” by Paul James Nov 11, 2004. Meant to be a promotion for Nick Gabrichidze’s public art projects in UK(typical corporate media idiocy full of babes, football, and “coolness” but still focusing on artistic side of Nick too)


Please note: only a specific essays and articles focused exlusevely about Nick Gabrichidze art are mentioned above. The routine interviews or reports from openings, or announcements are not mentioned. There were numerous radio and TV appearances in of that kind UK and Europe, including CNN “art club(by Cathy Worst)long ago(august 1998) but they are definitely difficult to track, so you may either disqualify that statement or accept it.

Most recent TV appearance(minor) was at 30/05 Nederland 3; 20.30 “In geheel Europa” talkshow Mon ; Nick Gabrichidze was invited through his own political party PvdA. However most list of most notable public art projects, which attracted most media and public attention is also included. Please see the list below:

  • 1.Public arts project called “Fucked up”(Tutle is removed from an official promotion material) in Amsterdam’s public library (http://www.oba.nl) at Princengracht 587 8 April – 3 June 2002; veritable by calling their management for inquiry and asking for details(ask to check by the dates, because of controversial title ;). The media responses and video files with a reports about opening(Dutch and some BBC day-time report if we are not mistaken are available in the library archive upon request
  • 2.
    File:Foyerhoreca.jpg
    File:Polanen2.jpg
    Millennium project in the foyer of Amsterdam’s “Polanentheater/theater” academy created at the summer 2000 and still standing. (http://www.polanentheater.nl). Verifiable by visiting the location Mon-Sat at (welcome to Amsterdam, artistic capital of Europe. Address: Polanenstraat 174, Amsterdam. Note – the location was chosen die to it’s artistic significance, because interior there was design by Berlage. Apparently the change of interior provoked the public discussion but was definitely accepted due to the decision of Amsterdam city counsel and advice from Dutch ministry of culture (verifiable in the same theater) (visual informaion may appear shortly)
  • 2
    File:Rockland outside.jpg
    The mural in Amsterdam
    The mural at the centre of Amsterdam(featured at the Nick Gabrichidze article page)which is used for numerous postcards, posters, flyers etc. Verifability: visiting a location at Raadhuisstraat 8 Amsterdam of any hip gift shop in Holland(also some other countries)
  • 3.
    File:Bavaria cowboy.jpg
    The complete change of interior at the “Bavaria” building in Amsterdam regarding the Gay Olympics in summer 1998;building was used as a main venue for the event. Currently called “ Pool and snooker centre “Old Zuid”. Verifyable by visiting the location van Ostadestraat 97 Amsterdam(Welcome to Amsterdam, cultural capital of the World); media reports are available in their archive as well
    File:Bav3.jpg
    additional image from bavaria project
    File:Bavara2.jpg
    Additional image from bavaria project
    File:Bav4.jpg
    additional image from bavaria project
    File:Bav5.jpg
    additional image from bavaria project



Recent publications written by Nick Gabrichidze

(in Russian regarding the european reaction to the attack on the theater in Moscow in 2002)

“Moskovsye novosti” n.42 29/10-4/11 2002 ;

http://www.mn.ru/issue.php?2002-42-24

N. Gabrichidze “Katinki v Televizore”

Note : Please feel free to re-edit the original artickle using this information if you feel that it is neccessay, but note: we do not want to see too many media links at the artickle, otherwise it may look like a resume or advertisement. You can also include the above shown images in other articles in wikipedia if you feel that they fit there; only with a mention of copyright holder (Nick Gabrichidze) and links to the Nick Gabrichidze page

The list is not complete and may be extended Authors 12:41, 15/07/2005 Amsterdam Etited(new information added) at 13:00; 15/07/2005 Amsterdam, Authors

NoteCopiright to all images belongs to Nick Gabrichidze; Authors 12 : 43 Amsterdam 15/07/2005

If the copyrights are being held by this person, then they may not be here, as they have not been released to GFDL and their appearance here is a copyright violation for each image. RickK 22:58, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Note: The copyright is not held by the person(s) who wrote the artickle; please do not confuse user name "gabrichidze" and phisical person and great artist Nick Gabrichidze. The copyright is held by artists Nick Gabrichidze from Amsterdam. Pictures are released here under the "fair use" which is how most art images are used by wikipedia.Images are publically available at the Internet, sourse is available at the each image file. Copyright holder agrees to have his images displayed at wikipedia under "fair use" rules so talking about copyright violation from a third uninvolved party is .. hmmm absolutely irrelevant(unless you claim hat YOUR copyright was violated, which is not the case) Please avoid copyright paranoya(scheck wikipedia to find out what it is) Authors

Note for administrators: we encountered a problem editing the page recently. The error saying "Valid document was not found in the cache and only-if-cached directive was specified" shows up each time we are trying to edit or format recent posts. This is written from a remote computer. Authors 12:46 15/07/2005 Amsterdam

"*Keep I want to support Nick, whose creativity very much to like me. Pictures of Nick are wonderful. It is very bad, that I have not seen here my favourite picture " the Flying Dutch ", but I think, that it can be corrected Ell 12 : 08 pm, 18 June (UTC) This is a vote cast by a phisical person,and I know her well, but it is so poorely etided that creates wrong impression. You may disqualify it if it lookssuspiciousAuthors

Anyway this vote went out of hand anyway, so could be better for all to close it up..

Keep and cleanup. --sparkit (talk) 14:33, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Note: Adding content to wikipedia is not a vandalism. However removing some of the content without any explanation, and respect for a people who contributed their time and efforts to make wikipedia a better place may be consider as such.

Please see :Policies_and_guidelines Vandalism

Key policies

Quote:"Respect other contributors. Wikipedia contributors come from many different countries and cultures, and have widely different views. Treating others with respect is key to collaborating effectively in building an encyclopedia. For some guidelines, see Wikipedia etiquette, Wikipedia:Writers rules of engagement, Wikipedia:Civility, Dispute resolution"

See also:Editing_policy

However if you would propose changing those rules and, in case of success, will get back to us with your proposal to remove al content we have added to this recourse we will consider it seriously.:

We consider that the images we offered to on-line journalism, Plato and geopolitics page contribute to those articles graphically. You have another opinion but you do not offer any other image to be considered. If you think those images don’t belong there please take your time to explain your opinion, we may find some compromise. When images have been removed from some other threads we politely asked why did it happen so we could negotiate some other solution, or even offer some other image, may be not Nick Gabrichidze's . For a time being here is no response. Well then your opinion is counted as your private opinion. Copy of this message will be posted at the threads where images are returned. If you will keep removing those images without any explanation the page protection request will be filed. If disputeabout removing the images illustrating the artickle only on the basis of someones personal taste will not be solved an arbitration for resolving dispute maybe considered. If you will bother to talk (and respect opponents arguments) about graphic content of wikipedia, about why you object this particular image(forget about author) we may find some reasonable solution. Otherwise we will keep our opinion and you keep yours. We appreciate your understanding. Authors of the artickle including user Gabrichidze(not Nick Gabrichidze the artist) 11:19 pm, Amsterdam June 20.

  • Delete. Completely a vanity page; also, use of sockpuppets. (Also, awful English, from both Gabrichidze and socks; I'm going to go clean up some of their(?) contribs now.) --Quuxplusone 22:55, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep but cleanup and do sanction user!!!. There are many less notable people who have article in WP. Cleanup, so it becomes less of an ad. His behavior of inserting his images to Surrealism, Plato, etc. should be sanctioned if policy permits. In spite of this, I would keep this article if someone cleans it up. -Irpen

23:14, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)


About inserting the images at Plato, Flying Dutchman or other pages

Unofficial note:Dear Irpen we appreciate your support(and especially support from user:sparkit who seems to be a professional in art research and surrealism history; even if page will be removed his opinion is very valuable for us)

But there is something you have mentioned which we sincerely do not understand: I would understand someone voting against keeping this page here, but what's wrong with contributing images of Nick Gabrichidze as an illustration to other articles? Would wikipedia have ton's of image data to illustrate the content and would we remove some other images to insert ours the frustration of wikipdians would be acceptable. But what is the objection against inserting some attractive graphical material to the pages which used to be absolutely image-empty, with just a plain text? I mean we can remove those images, but what's a point to contribute something at all to this resource then if every new contribution would be seen as insolence? Seriously why not to assume some good faith?

Would we put let's say image of mural with Bob Marley or the Pop art style image to the Plato page it would be idiocy and vandalism. But what was put there is a accurate reflection of "Plato’s cave" concept, the allegory created by Plato himself. It is not an abstract work which requires some extra understanding, it is a figurative image which is displaying the concept accurately. Same for other images-if wikipedians do not see how image of "Mermaids" at the "mermaid" page is connected with a content, please tell us what’s wrong. May be you will convince us and we will reconsider. Some people claim that images of "more notable paintings" should be put there. Fair enough, but so far no one bothered to find and put any image as far as we see. We are inserting something we consider interesting, and if someone has more interesting image-please offer it, we will be glad to see. But how can user be sanctioned for adding obviously topic related visual material to the content? If the fact that artists name is present on each image is irritating for you, then please note that it is not only acceptable but absolutely necessary for copyright reasons. I hope we made our motivation clear, but if there is another opinion please share it with us.

Honestly removing this page would be not pleasant but at least understandable. But aggressive and hostile (and in some extreme cases even vicious) reaction in response our attempts to contribute some visual material for this recourse is really a shock.

We will appreciate any help in cleaning up the Nick Gabrichidze page according to the Vikipedia standards, if someone can place a request for it will be more then appreciated. Authors 12 : 36 June 21, (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nick_Gabrichidze&oldid=15569498"