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. The consensus is clearly to delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:09, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Natalia Toreeva[edit]

Natalia Toreeva (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I've done some relatively extensive searching for references on this individual, as there are a lot of name drops and mentions. Unfortunately, in searching both normally and via some more art-specific publications via library databases([1], [2], [3] as a few examples, ), all I can find are mentions and name drops, with a few brief "bio" blurbs on some organizations which have been affiliated with her. I at one point had deleted this as the result of an AfD discussion, and restored it to draft when someone thought they could make something of it, but I just don't see the type of coverage necessary to sustain an article here. (I will also note that an editor who states they are the subject has been heavily involved with the article, though that has been done with full disclosure and via the talk page.) Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:07, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:25, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:25, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:25, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:26, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, there are simply no in-depth sources covering the subject in either English or Russian, Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything that a subject says or wants to say themselves: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject have published about it, in reliable places. If there are no such sources then we cannot have an article. Theroadislong (talk) 14:09, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete - The first AFD still appears to summarize the situation. The subject does a good job of promoting herself, but Wikipedia is not for self-promotion. It is hard to sort out any neutral secondary coverage of the subject from the amount of publicity that she is trying to create for herself, but which Wikipedia ignores. The subject might be notable, and might be the subject of a future article, but not as long as she keeps overwhelming the signal with her noise. What I have seen is not persuasive. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:03, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Autobio of a persistent self-promoter. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:18, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I too have done my share of searching for items in several databases and have come up empty. I've even searched for the Cyrillic spelling of her name in databases which accept that search parameter and could not find anything. Seeing the other searches that were performed by editors here, I can say with certainty that if this article can't be saved it won't be due to a lack of trying.  Spintendo  08:12, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, looks more like a resume or self promotion. Alex-h (talk) 08:38, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and WP:SALT. The page seems to be well-sourced, but the quality of the sources is wanting; the references are local, self-written, or non-neutral. Zero evidence that any major (Internationally reknown) museum, art show, or gallery has ever held her art. Totally spam. We are a charity, not a webhost. Bearian (talk) 13:58, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Disagree I submitted complain to DRN and requested to have independent editor(s) to help with improving the article and who knows the Russian lang. and Russian Art. Instead article was cut and submitted for deletion by the same 3 editors stated the article does not have reliable sources and notability. To have artist name in the Russian Encyclopedia, or included in the Artists Trade Union of Russia, or the list of the exhibitions in Russia and US - not reliable sources? To delete the education, Bibliography, Cinematography information, published books, etc - all not reliable sources? My opinion it is retaliation of the editors without good faith and without knowledge of content. Is it the way to solve the problem? That's why I asked to have the knowledgeable editor(s) to re-install the article that was cut (from 7 p. to 1 p.), and help with improving the article. I don't try to convince you not to delete article, I can see the direction it will go without even dispute, I just want you to know what is behind of submission of article for deletion.Toreeva (talk) 19:27, 8 November 2019 (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.