User talk:Khidekel

Hello, Khidekel, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
Check out some of these pages:
- Introduction to Wikipedia | Tutorial
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode

If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! AshLin (talk) 02:36, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't I edit some particular pages?

Some pages that have been vandalized repeatedly are semi-protected, meaning that editing by new or unregistered users is prohibited through technical measures. If you have an account that is four days old and has made at least 10 edits, then you can bypass semi-protection and edit any semi-protected page. Some pages, such as highly visible templates, are fully-protected, meaning that only administrators can edit them.

Where can I experiment with editing Wikipedia?

Use the main sandbox or create your own personal sandbox to experiment.

How do I create an article?

See how to create your first article, then use the Article Wizard to create one, and add references to the article as explained below.

How do I create citations?

Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like <ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing).
In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:

==References==
{{Reflist}}

What is a WikiProject, and how do I join one?

A WikiProject is a group of editors that are interested in improving the coverage of certain topics on Wikipedia. (See this page for a complete list of WikiProjects.) If you would like to help, add your username to the list that is on the bottom of the WikiProject page.

AshLin (talk) 02:36, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Dmitry Borshch

Hello Dawn Bard,

Getty Union List of Artist Names (ULAN), ARTstor, AskART, Arcadja, Artprice, and Who's Who in American Art are not reliable secondary sources?

Artcyclopedia describes ULAN as "an authoritative reference whose editorial guidelines are plainly laid out and whose original sources are clearly cited ... for professional or academic work, it's a better source for key information than Artcyclopedia..." ARTstor, AskART, Arcadja, Artprice, and Who's Who in American Art are accepted by ULAN as reliable secondary sources. ARTstor, for example, is reliable enough to be used by educators, scholars, curators, librarians, and students at more than 1350 universities, community colleges, museums, libraries, and K-12 schools in 46 countries. [1]

If Dmitry Borshch is notable enough to be included in ULAN, ARTstor, AskART, Arcadja, Artprice, and Who's Who in American Art, it is not for Dawn Bard to challenge his notability. I have undone your "contribution". Please contact me before making further contributions to this page.

Khidekel

Talkback

Hello, Khidekel. You have new messages at Dawn Bard's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Notability is implicit in the creation of the article. If the subject is not notable, an article about this subject should not be created.

I requested that you contact me in order to prevent repeated undoings of contributions. It would be courteous of you to contact the article’s creator before you question that article’s validity.

I am an art researcher, with a PhD in art history from St. Petersburg State Academic Institute of Fine Arts, Sculpture, and Architecture. The above-mentioned “reliable secondary sources” are edited by art researchers like me. Please do not question their ability to judge notability of artists like Borshch.

Khidekel

Hello, Khidekel. You have new messages at Dawn Bard's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:27, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Dmitry Borshch

Hello Several Times,

17 sources are not enough for a brief article? In Talk:Dmitry Borshch I wrote the following:

"Getty Union List of Artist Names (ULAN), ARTstor, AskART, Arcadja, Artprice, and Who's Who in American Art are not reliable secondary sources?

Artcyclopedia describes ULAN as "an authoritative reference whose editorial guidelines are plainly laid out and whose original sources are clearly cited ... for professional or academic work, it's a better source for key information than Artcyclopedia..." ARTstor, AskART, Arcadja, Artprice, and Who's Who in American Art are accepted by ULAN as reliable secondary sources. ARTstor, for example, is reliable enough to be used by educators, scholars, curators, librarians, and students at more than 1350 universities, community colleges, museums, libraries, and K-12 schools in 46 countries." [2]

Since December 17 this article has been examined by many editors who have agreed with me that it is sufficiently sourced. Your contribution has been undone.

--Khidekel (talk) 19:45, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Khidekel. You have new messages at Several Times's talk page.
Message added 20:00, 11 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

§everal⇒|Times 20:00, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming good faith

Hello again Khidekel. I've read your messages to Dawn Bard as they are very similar to those you left for me. In an effort to minimize further conflict, I suggest that you assume good faith when editing here. I'm not attempting to delete your additions and it didn't appear that Dawn Bard was, either. We just want to ensure that they are accurate and properly cited. §everal⇒|Times 20:10, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I never questioned your good faith, Several Times, but you should have read Talk:Dmitry Borshch before you contributed to the article, not after.

--Khidekel (talk) 20:47, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Khidekel. You have new messages at Several Times's talk page.
Message added 23:20, 11 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

§everal⇒|Times 23:20, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you google “Dmitry Borshch”, many links will appear than are not included in this article: exhibition announcements, blog entries, and so on.

I selected 17 notable sources, including 7 “reliable” ones: Who’s Who, ULAN, ARTstor, AskART, Arcadja, Artprice, RACC (edited by Regina Khidekel, PhD, RACC’s director). In order to be included in Who’s Who, Artprice, AskART, an artist must have a strong exhibition record, which is true of Borshch.

ARTstor blog is edited by the same qualified staff that edits ARTstor.

Fine Art Adoption Network is also a published source:

Simon, A. Fine Art Adoption Network: Art in General New Commissions Program Book Series, Vol. VII.

ISBN-10: 1934890073 ISBN-13: 978-1934890073

Artist a Day is not a blog and claims to have been visited by 25 million unique visitors. Is that notable enough of a link to be included in the article? My answer is yes.

--Khidekel (talk) 02:15, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel that Asphalt Eden is the best reference, another interesting interview with Borshch was published in The Associative Press, also cited in the article.

--Khidekel (talk) 02:41, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Dmitry Borshch

Thank you for your "cleanup", Lotje, but I have undone it. What is the purpose of a selected works section without links to the works? Borshch's page is partly modeled on Hans Memling's page, where, appropriately, selected works are linked.

Three pictures do not make a gallery. If you decide to build a gallery (or anything else), please do not leave the task unfinished.

Khidekel (talk) 17:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Khidekel. You have new messages at Lotje's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Lotje ツ (talk) 03:33, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Dmitry Borshch for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dmitry Borshch is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dmitry Borshch until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

Your recent edit

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Dmitry Borshch. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. Sionk (talk) 23:10, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whose comments did I delete? Such false accusations will not improve your standing in the Wikipedia community.

I removed your notice because you are not qualified to place it, having no expert knowledge of Russian, Russian-American, Ukrainian, or Ukrainian-American art. You did not even read the article references before you placed it.

Instead of placing that notice again, please respond to my statement above and others in User talk:Khidekel.

Khidekel (talk) 00:19, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Dmitry Borshch. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. DarkAudit (talk) 00:59, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Khidekel for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 19:38, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dmitry Borshch

Hello Excirial,

I have never misused my Wikipedia account. On Tuesday I mentioned to a friend that my article is being judged unfairly but did not ask her to edit or contribute. In accordance with Wikipedia guidelines I assume good faith, and did not accuse Sionk of meatpuppetry or collusion because she voted a few hours apart on the same day with Carrite.

I also assume that none of the voters except me have read any of the "Further reading" sources or Borshch's biography in Who's Who in American Art, and yet they rush to delete.

Sincerely, Khidekel (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hiyas there Khidekel,

I'll believe you on your word that you did not intend for this entire sock puppetry situation to happen, which is also the reason why only the three new accounts are blocked. The accusation itself should not be to odd though, as you were the only editor arguing to keep the article, while all of a sudden three new accounts pop up out of nowhere and head straight to the article in question. As you might imagine this is very strange behavior for new editors and thus suggest that something fishy is going on here. In this case a checkuser indeed confirmed that all three accounts were related, hence the blocks that were issued.

All article's marked for deletion are publically listed on WP:AFD, so its not that odd that two longer-term editors involve themselves sometime after each other. If it puts your mind at ease: i intersected Carrite and Sionk contributions, and besides being having quite high edit counts they have little to no on-wiki dealings with one another.

As for the article itself i fear i have to agree with the others involved in the deletion discussion. While there are a lot of sources they are mostly trivial mentions, images or pages that otherwise don't pass the reliable source criteria. In fact it is not the amount of mentions that cover notability, it is the quality of those sources. One or two good quality article's from - for example - renowned newspapers or scientific publications are worth more then 30 trivial mentions. In fact it only takes one or two sources to pass WP:42, and that is all that is needed. Yet if it cannot pass this criteria an article is removed, as it wouldn't pass the inclusion criteria. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 18:09, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]