Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Self-Portrait (Sofonisba Anguissola)

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 speedy keep. (non-admin closure)   Kadzi   (talk) 21:41, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Self-Portrait (Sofonisba Anguissola)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Self-Portrait (Sofonisba Anguissola) (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)

Doesn't seem to be a notable painting, with strange references. Appears on List_of_paintings_by_Sofonisba_Anguissola which I believe is suitable, rather than a whole article.   Kadzi   (talk) 23:00, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions.   Kadzi   (talk) 23:00, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep In the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna. The work is written about in textbooks and peer reviewed books. I just added a few, and the link to the collection page. Please look WP:BEFORE you leap, as things aren't always what that seem to be from the page itself. Theredproject (talk) 23:39, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
• Speedy keep noted work by very famous artist. Discussed in additional sources here and here. Mccapra (talk) 03:31, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
• Keep I'm sorry to see that a new NPP got caught up in this. Here's some context: At the time of nomination, the sources were listed as
  "SOPHONISBA ANGUSSOLA VIRGO SEIPSAM FECIT 1554". and
  Inventario GG 285.
  One could be forgiven for finding these "strange". They're worse than strange, they're useless. The first is merely a transcription of what everybody can already read on the painting itself. The second is not a citation, "Inventario" refers to the Inventory Number that the museum uses: GG means Gemäldegalerie. So the reference is this: https://www.khm.at/objektdb/detail/66/ And just how in the world is the "general reader" for whom we write this encyclopedia supposed to know this?
  Unfortunately, this article is just one of a large number of very poorly sourced articles translated from Italian. Its creator is unresponsive to suggestions for improvement and has dismissed such complaints as from "the reference police" [1] I have given up trying to reason with them and decided that fixing the references is the best way to deal with this. Unfortunately, it requires more effort to fix than to translate these articles. I'd be a favor of blocking their creator for creating more work for others than what they're doing themselves. Vexations (talk) 10:58, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:04, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:04, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

• Keep there is no issue with keeping this well-sourced article on an old painting; the painting is in a collection and numerous authors have written about it.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:42, 6 June 2020 (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.