Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Egg-Stamp (Fabergé egg)


 * 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. Daniel (talk) 09:41, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Egg-Stamp (Fabergé egg)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

While this Fabergé egg seal exists, there is nothing to indicate that it is notable. The only sources I can find with any discussion are auction sites, so this feels promotional. The two Russian sources used in the article don't mention it. (I came across this via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Shiawase-wo_and_Egg-Stamp_%28Faberg%C3%A9_egg%29_article) Fences  &amp;  Windows  00:49, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  Fences  &amp;  Windows  00:49, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions.  Fences  &amp;  Windows  00:49, 9 February 2021 (UTC)


 * comment I've done some substantial rewriting of this to make it clear what is actually being talked about: it's actually a signet stamp in the form of a Faberge egg. No opinion on notability as yet. My assumption would be, though, that it is referred to in English by a different name. Mangoe (talk) 04:20, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * On further reflection, delete. There is a Finnish source mentioning the object in passing as an example of how Finns were part of the Faberge shop, and because (I gather) the object is in Finland now. But it clearly doesn't enjoy anything like the fame of the imperial eggs, and there are no English sources that I could find. At any rate the current text is terrible and perhaps quite inaccurate. Mangoe (talk) 04:42, 9 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Other than a couple of auction pages I can't find anything to show that this is notable. 92.3.131.156 (talk) 13:21, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't see how the article establishes notability for a single work of art. Although we don't have a specific notability criteria for objects of art it fails WP:SIGCOV. In general if one has trouble finding sources to support an object's notability than the it likely fails GNG. Blue Riband► 19:45, 9 February 2021 (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.