From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Missvain ( talk) 23:36, 6 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Vlastimil Beránek (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NARTIST. non notable artist Theroadislong ( talk) 22:25, 30 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Theroadislong ( talk) 22:25, 30 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Czech Republic-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 22:50, 30 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks. I read 'Fails WP:NARTIST' - I would have thought the artist qualifies at least under criteria #4 based on the citations contained in the original article, but I guess questions of significance and notability are extremely subjective. I can only hope the entry is not deleted, and will work on the suggestions made in the Teahouse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackpebblemedia ( talkcontribs) 23:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Comment There are three sources one of which is his own website, which criteria do you think he passes (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. I'm not seeing it? Theroadislong ( talk) 00:07, 31 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Comment - Blackpebblemedia, I have a long-time interest in glass art, and altho I very seldom edit in that area, this might help explain why Baránek is not notable by encyclopedia standards. To clarify: if you look at the collections in which Baránek's work is included you will find that his are very minor and non-notable in comparison with his teacher-mentor Stanislav Libenský whose collections include the Metropolitan Museum of Art and many other notable museums. Therefore, it's WP:TOOSOON for Baránek, whereas Libenský and his wife, Brychtová clearly meet WP:NARTIST. Does that help to clear things up why criteria #4 of NARTIST does not apply? Netherzone ( talk) 00:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Since you mentioned your long-time interest in glass art, perhaps you would be interested in improving commenting on AfD for Jan Frydrych? Anton.bersh ( talk) 18:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Comment - Blackpebblemedia has been blocked until doing a name change. Even after that remedied, prohibited from editing the draft directly, for COI, but may be able to identify refs on the Talk page of the article that establish notability. Or not. David notMD ( talk) 02:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete most of the coverage mentioned is from Yachting magazines. At first I assumed it is because he was selling work to people with superyachts. While this seems to be true, the art, or commissioned work, is flowing through a company called Crystal Caviar, as described here. We don't have any categories in WP:ARTIST that cover art produced by companies. Moreover, the art being made there is not generating reviews, collections or exhibitions, it would seem, as it is outside of the traditional gallery and museum structure. As their website says, "Every piece of crystal is made by our craftsmen. We produce art Bohemian crystal chandeliers, glass walls, mirrors for private yachts, residences, 5* hotels and spas." Now look at the shows mentioned in the article: he has "exhibited" at a half dozen yacht shows. Most of the current article is really about a company producing commissioned artworks. it might be possible to consider that for NCORP, but it's pretty clear that the types of articles they are getting are on the level of paid coverage. Overall, I would call this WP:SPAM: an advertisement for the Crystal Caviar company masquerading as an article. " --- Possibly ( talk) 06:19, 31 May 2021 (UTC) reply

- For the record, it wasn't masquerading as anything - it was always transparent, factual, accurate - and completely open to being edited in an open forum, exactly as described by Anton down below. More of that kind of altruistic approach wouldn't be too much to ask, surely.

The user blackpebblemedia has also declared on their talk page that they were editing this page as a favor to the artist. A few months before that another PR-sounding account was at it: Paulbarronmedia. I don't think I have ever seen two PR companies editing an article on an artist. --- Possibly ( talk) 06:53, 31 May 2021 (UTC) reply

- paulbarronmedia is neither a PR company, nor a company of any kind whatsoever. It's an email address for one of the operators of Black Pebble Media. The comment above is false and misleading. No need for it, Poss. Peace out.

And just to nail down the idea that his is a purely promotional article, the editor who created it Kristýna WIKI also created Jaroslav Prošek (since deleted) and Jan Frydrych. Along with Vlastimil Beránek, they are all artists represented by "Crystal Caviar". --- Possibly ( talk) 07:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Since you mentioned Jan Frydrych, please note that it was recently nominated for deletion. Please take a second to comment there if you are interested. Anton.bersh ( talk) 17:52, 31 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete and start over. As is, this article fails to establish notability, reads as a promotional piece and obviously is riddled with WP:COI problems. I think it's better to just delete it and start with a clean draft in draft space, so it's a case of WP:TNT. @ Blackpebblemedia: if you are interested, I can help out with a draft by reviewing it and fixing the writing style (but not finding sources because I do not have access to offline media which could contain relevant sources). But you would need to find sources first because currently there is simply not enough to build an article with. Anton.bersh ( talk) 18:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Anton - that would be really appreciated. This is exactly the type of guidance we were first hoping for / expecting when originally submitting. What's the next step?2603:8001:a400:4b:f5ae:d2d6:d406:e8d6 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp (UTC).

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.