User talk:Leningradartist

Hello, Leningradartist! helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Dlohcierekim 00:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply ] Getting started Getting mentored How to: create your first article Article Creation Wizard Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation User scripts

Thank you for your input on Russian art. Can you create an English

• Dear colleague, thank you so much, and I am looking forward to do it in some days. Can I looking forward for your help? Sincerely Leningradartist (talk) 16:30, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to help, although my knowledge of Russian art is limited...Modernist (talk) 22:00, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Dear Colleague, I continue to prepare an article on "Leningrad School of Painting”. Two days ago has been created the first article about one of its representatives - Leningrad artist
  Alexander Semionov, and also created new Category:Leningrad school of painting. But today category suddenly nominated for deletion with a very strange arguments. If you have an opinion on this subject, you can make it on the page discussion: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_April_8#Category:Leningrad_school_of_painting. I think that, as in Russian Wikipedia, expert opinions should be heard in such cases. Sincerely, Leningradartist (talk) 20:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

A category that you have recently created has been proposed for deletion. Discussion is open at

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Evgenia Antipova, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.leningradschool.com/bio/a.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on

• Doing. Leningradartist (talk) 14:31, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...contain the same works. Btw, I like your articles on Russian painters. Keep up the good work. Best regards. --

• Thank you for note! Doing. Kind Regard, Leningradartist (talk) 14:37, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The paintings of

Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:00, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

• I prefer "pupil", but dictionary and native americans advice "inmate" (as "graduate" for Art Institute). Leningradartist (talk) 16:25, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Rudolf Frentz, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.leningradartist.com/bio/f.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on

• Doing. Leningradartist (talk) 21:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Alexander Tatarenko has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no evidence of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{

• Addition of one ref was insufficient to justify removal of the refimprove tag. What I want to see is links to independant,
  reliable sources that demonstrate that you are notable. Do not remove the {{refimprove}} tag again; ask me and I will remove it if I think you have done the job. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Links to reputable independent sources added. Please remove the warning. Thank you for advice. Leningradartist (talk) 14:58, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• What the [expletive deleted] are you talking about? You have not touched the article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:23, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Again, Links to independent sources added (as you asked). When you have other claims, good enough to explain them. Please remove the warning. Leningradartist (talk) 15:34, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Are we living in some looking-glass world? I requested "links to independant, reliable sources" at 14:25, 23 June 2010. You have not edited the program since then, so why do you claim "links to independent sources added". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:48, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Dear colleague, the text of a short article about the Russian artist Alexander Tatarenko has 4 links to the independent and authoritative sources. In addition, in the section "Bibliography" are still 16 independent and authoritative source. If you are acquainted with them and feel that they are not enough, or they are not a competent and independent, please indicate the specific data that needs by your opinion in the additional references, or please remove your warning. Leningradartist (talk) 22:12, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the tip. I was first confronted with the observation of this kind, so I want to clarify: it refers to different dates in the text of the biography of the artist? And who will determine what needs to be linkid, and what is not? Your comment seems to me correct, but this matter should be left for the author of the text biographies. Leningradartist (talk) 23:08, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Leningradartist, I've only just seen your question -- better to have put it on my talk page, where I would have seen it sooner.

To answer your question, it used to be recommended that we wikified all dates: I think this was because it allowed the dates to show up in whichever date format a reader had specified as his preference. But some time ago the policy changed. Now, the preferred style is only to wikify dates if they have a direct connection with the subject of the article. I'm not sure how this works in practice -- I guess that an article on Napoleon's invasion of Russia could plausibly link to the article for 1812 because the invasion was a significant in that year, but an artist opening an exhibition in a particular year may be significant for the artist but is rarely a significant event taking the year as a whole, so there's no need to wikify the year. The same applies even more so to months and individual dates.

The other aspect is when the same topic is mentioned several times in an article, as in your lists of artists who shared exhibitions. The preferred style (according to MOS) is to wikify the first occurrence, but not the later ones (unless it's a very long article, when a second wikilink might be helpful). The idea, as I understand it, is that articles where large chunks consist of blue wikilinks are difficult to read and, more especially, the helpfulness of the links for a reader is reduced when too many links appear close together.

When you say that the matter should be left to the author of an article, you're overlooking the fact that WP has a manual of style which, while not mandatory, is certainly preferred, The intention isn't to limit what you write, but to try to ensure that articles present a reasonably similar appearance and are as readable as possible. Do have a read of the help page I linked to above -- it probably explains things far better than I have. Regards. Jimmy Pitt talk 23:34, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the detailed response to my questions. I will try to take into account these new criteria, although it requires in each case, an additional and thoughtful consideration. For example, after your comments I would like to remove links to the year and city in the list of exhibitions of the artist Lev Orekhov. But then discovered that these links can be very useful for those who are interested in, for example in Leningrad in 1957 or in 1960. Thanks to them information about these exhibitions displayed in the list of articles about Leningrad 1957. In short, I will try to gently remove really unwanted and duplicate links. Kind Regard, Leningradartist (talk) 10:55, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's the way to go! The MOS guidelines are just that . . . guidelines: if you think there's a good reason for the wikilink, then do it. regards Jimmy Pitt talk 11:45, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I have a question about the phrase "regarded as one of the inmates", used in some 65 articles you've written. It doesn't make sense to me (a native English speaker) and I'd like to help you reword it so as to improve the articles you've written. Maybe you could tell me what you mean by "inmates" in Russian (I understand Russian pretty well) and I can help you find a better word in English, because that one doesn't mean what you probably intend it to. Thank you, DVD 16:09, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello, and thank you for your help. Phrase "Regarded as one of the inmates and brightest representatives of the Leningrad school of painting" mean by Russian the following: "..., являющийся воспитанником и одним из ярких представителей ленинградской школы живописи." Не все художники - представители ленинградской школы являлись ее воспитанниками. Некоторые сложились как художники до ее возникновения, другие учились, например, в Харькове, или в Киеве, и лишь позднее переехали в Ленинград. Leningradartist (talk) 22:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I see. It's just that the word "inmate" in English has a pretty limited definition and means someone who is captive in a prison or confined to a hospital. I suggest just omitting the word "inmate" in this sentence, and saying, "Regarded as one of the brightest representatives of the Leningrad school of painting". Let me know if you have any questions. DVD 00:23, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• OK, I am agree, Thanks for advice. Leningradartist (talk) 16:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Leningradartist, I've reverted a couple of your edits, and believe that other art editors have raised valid concerns about them. It appears that you are stacking articles with Russian artists and paintings, using your book as the only source to support the edits, and adding images from your book. The entire endeavor raises concerns of conflict of interest, or that a primary motive is to promote your book and the artists and paintings therein. Another concern is that you revert other editors, without explanation--this, too, gives the appearance of an agenda, and may broach edit-warring. Can you cite any other publications in addition to your book that ascribe prominence to these artists? They are very good, but by pushing this you render it inevitable that other artists and art historians will maintain the obvious, that Buchkin is not of the same historical level as van Gogh. Thanks, JNW (talk) 00:51, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Dear Colleague
  Alexander Samokhvalov, and others ) in addition to text links to sources, a section "Bibliography" with the list of publications that contain information about the artist. How have you managed the entire list of printed sources detected only my humble book? Further, if you're familiar with my book, it is easy to verify that the images are uploaded to the Commons are taken not only from book. In both cases, I have a legitimate right, and you as an experienced user can easily and quickly if you want to make sure. Because my work in Wikipedia is absolutely transparent and legitimate and stakeholders on the facts and documents, but not on unsubstantiated speculation and prejudice. Thanks, Leningradartist (talk) 13:34, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Per above you are

WP:CONSENSUS. If you conduct continues, you will be blocked. Ty 01:58, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I agree with the comments above by JNW and Ty, please stop adding works to articles without independent justification or reference or regard to the historical nature of the articles. I have made suggestions to you to create separate articles to elicit understanding of the history of Russian painting. You can create - Russian portrait painting, Russian Still-life painting, and Russian landscape painting to trace the idioms development and its relationship with the painting from other cultures...Modernist (talk) 04:35, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Dear Colleague
  Alexander Samokhvalov? All these artists have in english and russian Wiki special articles. Without going into the controversy, I want to still recall known fact that in many respects thanks to the "Socialist Realism" and Russian Art School above genres have been preserved in its traditional sense in easel painting of the 20th century. I think that this discussion will help to improve the above-mentioned articles. For my part, I'm always grateful to colleagues for practical advice and comments. Leningradartist (talk) 17:52, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

In my opinion because of the cold war most Russian art is underknown in the west, which is why I am suggesting that you write those articles about different aspects of Russian painting. Adding a few names of important innovative artists to those articles are ok; however you swamped those articles with everything but the kitchen sink. I find most of your suggestions too conventional and too recent to essentially redefine the idioms. Continue to add a few live links of important artists as you did to Still-life earlier today...Modernist (talk) 18:46, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Dear сolleague Modernist, thanks for the reply, but your arguments did not satisfy me. I think that it is impossible to write articles on art for Wikipedia, and while continuing to sit in the trenches of the Cold War. Such articles are inevitably biased and keep people apart, which contradicts the objectives of the Wikipedia. There is a fairly details books in English dedicated to Soviet painting. For the same educational goals I had grant Wikipedia the rights on a few hundred images of paintings by Russian artists 1930-1990 period. But the creators of the articles Landscape painting, Still life painting, and Portrait painting ignored these materials, and my effort to add these images also has been removed. I continue to insist on their restoration (see above). With regard to the text sections on the 20th century Russian painting for these articles, they will be prepared. Thanks, Leningradartist (talk) 20:53, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am curious how many 20th century American artists you have included and in which articles are they in the Russian wikipedia?. Are there many American 19th century and 20th century painters in the articles about Landscape painting, Still Life and Portrait painting in the Russian wikipedia?. Have you added the massive lists and images of the Russian painters you want to add here to those same articles in the Russian wikipedia?. Have you added this article: Sergei Ivanov (art historian) to the Russian wikipedia?...Modernist (talk) 22:07, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear сolleague

Landscape Painting, or Portrait painting. With regard to articles on similar subjects in the Russian section of Wikipedia, it is in my opinion a disgrace. If you could add to their material on the 19th and 20th century American artists, accompanied by illustrations, it would be great. You can be sure that delete them, no one would mind. The artical: Sergei Ivanov (art historian) has been delated from Russian Wiki. You can see discussion here Thank you, Leningradartist (talk) 09:53, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi Leningradartist, I've restored the autobiography and third-party reference templates to your biography, and explained the rationale here [1]. As I mentioned above, I like the artists and respect your scholarship, but there need to be objective sources about you. Referring to your own publications is circular, and links showing that your books are sold at museums and galleries don't establish notability. Please read

• Dear Colleague
  WP:RELIABLE. Includes additional external links to Mr. Ivanov's book when it is used by well-known libraries, museums, and art galleries. I would like also to clarify that as an art historian, Mr. Ivanov wrote about the phenomenon of meaningful and relevant staff for Russian painting of the 20th century. This confirms the references to his book in the study of Russian-Soviet art and creativity of individual artists. Thank you once more for advices and remarks. Leningradartist (talk) 21:37, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Hi Leningradartist. I don't think a single link complies with

WP:COI. JNW (talk) 21:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

A discussion has begun about whether the article Sergei Ivanov (art historian), which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sergei Ivanov (art historian) until a concensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Smartse (talk) 16:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Leningradartist, please familiarise yourself with our

• Dear Colleague, Thank you for your letter. I understand your concern and I thank you for the specific proposals. I considered these versions and give you an answer without delay. Leningradartist (talk) 19:26, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Dear Colleague, I am agree with your suggestion to create a separate
  List of painters from Leningrad school, modelled after the List of Russian artists, and move the Leningrad painters there, leaving only several most prominent on the List of Russian artists. As I understood you correctly, you will create such list yourself and add to it material that already exists? If so, then there is on my side no objections. In this case I would like ask you to leave in the List of Russian artists the following artists: Evgenia Antipova, Sergei Osipov, Lev Russov, Alexander Samokhvalov, Nikolai Timkov, Alexander Semionov, Nikolai Galakhov, Mikhail Kaneev, and Nikolai Baskakov. The other artists I'll be adding a new list itself. How much time you need to create it? Thank you, Leningradartist (talk) 20:12, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• I can create such list in a very short time. But we need to fix its name beforehand. I've just noticed that
  List of Leningrad painters as a redirect). What do you prefer? Greyhood (talk) 20:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• List of painters from Leningrad school as redirects) with a main article Saint Petersburg Union of Artists. By my opinion this allows to make a list of fairly compact and specific in time and composition. Leningradartist (talk) 21:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• OK, its a bit late time at my place, so I think I'll create this list tomorrow evening, with all redirects and links from and to Saint Petersburg Union of Artists and List of Russian artists. Cheers, Greyhood (talk) 22:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you, and keep me informed. Leningradartist (talk) 22:14, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Petrov-Vodkin, of course). Perhaps I've not added all of the relevant painters from the old list to the new one, please check it. My regards, Greyhood (talk) 14:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Thank you, I had reviewed and have so far only one question: on my computer in the new list all tables have a different width. For example, tables "T" and "O" is considerably narrower than the "C" and "M". At the same time in the old list all tables have the same width. I could not understand why. Please advice. Leningradartist (talk) 00:24, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, in fact the tables are of different width in the original list too, but it is not seen on smaller monitors. The width of the tables depends on the width of their contents, in this case mainly the lengths of artists' descriptions in the second column. I've fixed the problem in the List of painters of Saint Petersburg Union of Artists by giving each table a fixed size ("width=1000pt", see the latest diff). Greyhood (talk) 11:08, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks, excellent! For convenience viewing, I reduced the length to 900, if you have no objection. Leningradartist (talk) 15:44, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Glad to help you. Perhaps there are other ways to fix the size, I don't know it for sure, but you may try and read Help:Table. Greyhood (talk) 16:12, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• See a log of files removed today here.

• Shut off the bot here.

• Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:01, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey bro,

You do a great job with Russian painters and artists. I'm wondering if you could direct some effort towards the abysmal state of Category:Romanian painters. If you find the biographies, I'll gladly convert them to wikipedia pages. Let me know. Soundsboy (talk) 08:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Please explain the reasons why you deleted my last contribution regarding the Russian art and Russian artists. Thank you. Leningradartist (talk) 21:51, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because 1957 is not all about Russian artists, as before perhaps make a timeline devoted to Soviet art - which has little or nothing in common with the American/European art world.

You indiscriminately add massive galleries and irrelevant and unnecessary lists where they do not belong, if there was a significant event, or an international exhibition, or a particular occurrence then only add that...Modernist (talk) 22:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see response on your talk page. Thank you. Leningradartist (talk) 00:22, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Please explain the reasons why you deleted my last contribution regarding the Russian art and Russian artists. Thank you. Leningradartist (talk) 21:51, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because 1957 is not all about Russian artists...Modernist (talk) 22:40, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you so much Colleague! Your response must be understood so that you are not guided by specific paragraphs of the rules of Wikipedia, but your own tastes and preferences? Let me note you also that the article 1957 in art applies equally to the art of all countries. And if there is no material of any country - it is a problem especially those who wrote about the art of this country. And it can not be grounds for removal of material related to other countries. If you think this article should be devoted exclusively to the events of one culture - to create an article with this special name. For example, 1957 in art of the United States. Then your actions will be clear. Now they are similar to systemic discrimination on ethnic or national origin. But the rules of Wikipedia is prohibited its. Therefore, I ask you to recover deleted material. Thank you and my regards, Leningradartist (talk) 00:17, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If there was a significant event, or an international exhibition, or a particular occurrence then only add that. And stay off my talk page in the future, I am tired of your disingenuous innocent act and I agree with JNW below...Modernist (talk) 01:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Agree with Modernist; the article as it stands includes numerous cultures, not just references to art in the United States. I do find your claim disingenuous: what you have done is 'overstack' articles with material relating only to your background, and to artists that you have written about and presumably represent; prior to Modernist's reversion, you had in essence co-opted the article on behalf of Leningrad artists [2]. Often your preferred source is your own publication. Per
  WP:SELFCITING, many of these additions rely only upon your say-so for their claims to prominence, and have been accepted thus far in a spirit of openness, as well as, one surmises, a dearth of scholarship on English Wikipedia regarding recent Russian art. JNW (talk) 00:35, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

This is to notify you that I have initiated a discussion of your work at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Biography#Russian_painters. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:54, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a courtesy note to inform you that, following a discussion at

• removing links to dates and date fragments, as this is no longer encouraged on English Wikipedia (see
  WP:Linking
  );
• removing links to common terms such as Russia and USSR, and repeat links for same (see
  WP:Linking
  );
• removing mentions in the lead of the artists' membership of the
  reliably sourced
• removing the
  laundry list
  which were constituted by the 'Principal exhibitions' when it appears that these were contradictorily exhibitions shared with tens of other artists;
• removing entries in the 'Bibliography' sections pertaining to exhibition catalogues and directories as these are commercial documents of no encyclopaedic value;
• adding tags requesting citations for works being in museums or notable private collections, where there is such mention in the article

In addition to the foregoing, I have redirected 'List of painters of Saint Petersburg Union of Artists', which seemed to me nothing more than a pretty

Please stop adding individuals to the recent year articles that do not meet the criteria in

]

Nomination of

Russian Winter. Hoarfrost (painting)

for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russian Winter. Hoarfrost (painting) 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 good 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. SmartSE (talk) 15:29, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Malaya Sadovaya street (painting) 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 good 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. SmartSE (talk) 15:35, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per your suggestion I've begun a discussion regarding your edits away from the Articles for Deletion pages. Thanks, JNW (talk) 20:43, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Я прокомментировал, но в будущем рекомендую вам не охотиться на участников поодиночке, а обращать внимание на подобные ситуации на

); June 27, 2011; 15:12 (UTC)

In recognition of your work

		The Barnstar of Fine Arts
		For your work on many articles related to socialist realism and uploading multiple good paintings. GreyHood Talk 16:34, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Спасибо за эту оценку и участие в дискуссии. Ответил на Вашей страничке. Leningradartist (talk) 17:49, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain this edit of your page. Originally you have mentioned: I am a holder of exclusive right for text and visual material published in my book (Sergei V. Ivanov. Unknown Socialist Realism. The Leningrad School. - Saint Petersburg: NP-Print Edition, 2007. – p. 450.

• Thank you for your question. User is not going to either confirm or deny his identity with a real person registered under name Leningradartist, or with other real persons (or their aliases), the identity with which openly tried to discuss some of the users. If the grounds for this purpose, as I see now were some of inaccuracies on the user page, now their seems to be corrected in order to eliminate the grounds for such analogies in the future. Leningradartist (talk) 08:36, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In such case please prove that you indeed hold the copyright rights on the book that you claim to have the rights for. Your statement above shows that you for some reason are not willing to say the truth. SuperMarioWoman (talk) 03:17, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered,

	The Civility Barnstar
	Privet, mne nuzna pomow v napisanii malenkogo artikla na WIki. Moi skype: muworx Moi email: [email protected] Pozaluista pomogite mne, sro4no do subboti. Alexandrestudio (talk) 16:25, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Leningradartist! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

		Russian Barnstar of National Merit
		For your extensive work on Russian/Soviet art and artists, and for all the beautiful images/paintings you've contributed. Thank you.--INeverCry 21:22, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Спасибо. И очень неожиданно. Удачи Вам. Leningradartist (talk) 22:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Leningradartist, and thank you for your contributions!

An article you worked on

• Doing. --Leningradartist (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ernst Lissner has been translated from the Russian Wikipedia, but as I can't read or speak Russian, I wonder if you could check the article for Google mistakes. That would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a million, Krenakarore ^TK 21:26, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Done. Leningradartist (talk) 10:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Magnificently done......:) ! The readers of the world thank you for your timely intervention. It's nice to learn from those who know. Krenakarore ^TK 10:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just did an article on Osip Braz, who seems to have some importance, atleast because of his portrait of Chekhov. I was able to find this low-res portrait of Braz, which will do for now, but I'd love to have something a bit better. Are there any other portraits of him anywhere? (If you have the time to look)INeverCry 01:53, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a read at the following talk page

• Done. Leningradartist (talk) 20:24, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Thanks for creating the new articles 1931 in fine arts of the Soviet Union and 1932 in fine arts of the Soviet Union and working to improve Wikipedia. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:08, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, your personal opinion would be greatly appreciated here Leningradartist. We all thank you, Krenakarore ^TK 01:24, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Alexander Zaytsev (artist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amur (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:03, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please drop by

• Done. Thank you for discussion. Leningradartist (talk) 21:33, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for your great contribution to ruwiki. Its admins are just incompetent in art and use their banhammers more often than artworks. Psychiatrick (talk) 23:49, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I was wondering if you'd be able to help me find some information about a painting somebody else asked me to find. Now, I'm completely unqualified for this kind of search, and googling didn't turn up anything promising, and since you are the only person I (kinda sorta) know with an expertise in the field, I thought I'd give it a shot.

I haven't seen the painting myself; all I have is its verbal description. Hopefully, it would be sufficient. The painting shows an open window with an off-the-hook phone receiver lying on the window sill. I also know that it was displayed in Tretyakov Gallery some time in 1970, and that it is probably not by a very well-known painter (but I can't vouch for that). Do you have any ideas as to which painting that might be?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); May 29, 2012; 13:23 (UTC)

• I am sorry, Colleague, but I have not any ideas about this painting and author :) Leningradartist (talk) 14:00, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; I had to try :) Thanks anyway!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 4, 2012; 12:05 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from

• Thank you, done. Best, Leningradartist (talk) 22:24, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please advice: can I add fair-use images also to List of painters of Saint Petersburg Union of Artists, or in the artist biography only? Thank you! Leningradartist (talk) 22:59, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Belov-Yuri-Vladimirovich-aa51bw.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 11:54, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Borisov-Veniamin-Ivanovich-20bw.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 11:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Bizova-Zlata-Nikolaevna-biz bw.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 11:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Kostenko-Elena-Mikhailovna-29bw.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the

Thanks for uploading File:Dobrekova-Irina-Mikhailovna-dobr-bw.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the

Thanks for uploading File:Getmanskaya-Irina-Ivanovna-22.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the

Thanks for uploading File:Gorb-Tatiana-Vladimirovna-gorbt bw.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the

Thanks for uploading File:Gorokhova-Elena-Konstantinovna-goroh-bw.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the

Thanks for uploading File:Nazina-Vera-Ivanovna-nazina b.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the

Thanks for uploading File:Kozlovskaya-Marina-Andreevna-aa49bw.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the

Please advice: can I add fair-use images also to List of painters of Saint Petersburg Union of Artists, or in the artist biography only? Thank you! Leningradartist (talk) 13:21, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

The short answer is no. The longer answer is in the section

Hello, Leningradartist. You have new messages at Stefan2's talk page.
Message added 19:53, 27 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Varichev-Ivan-Mikhailovich-varichev w.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the

Thanks for uploading File:Tkachenko-Leonid-Anisimovich-aa21bw.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the

Thanks for uploading File:Stolbov-Alexander-Sergeevich-aa2bw.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the

Thanks for uploading File:Smirnova-Galina-Alexandrovna-smir bw.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to
   di-replaceable fair use disputed
   }}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the

Lord Roem ~ (talk) 08:02, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply