Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ivan Lindsay


 * 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. Other than walls of text from the article's primary author, unanimous agreement that this fails WP:GNG due to low-quality sources. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:04, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Ivan Lindsay

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Can't find any independent in-depth coverage of him fails WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 15:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:29, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:29, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

I would be most grateful for some third party opinions on this. This started when I added Dr Ellington Darden as a distinguished alumni on the Florida State University page. DR Darden was a champion bodybuilder (17 titles) and has written 75 books on Health and has sold over 7m copies of his books making him most likely Florida State's most published alumni. In 2018 he was shortlisted by FSU themselves to be the Alumni of the Year. Theroadislong deleted my one line on Darden saying he cant be notable because he doest have a Wiki page. So I write a page for Dr Darden which Theroadislong deleted saying Self promotion (DR Darden is 75 years old and is not chasing self promotion) Then Theroadislong looked through my other work and saw that I have been adding to Ivan Lindsay's site for the last 10 years and he flagged that for Speedy Deletion. Ivan Lindsay is one of the Worlds leading private art dealers (private means the deals are not a matter of public record), has set over 50 world record prices, and he is a writer, lecturer etc. 7 books, 60 articles, lectures all over etc. I started adding a mass of secondary reputable sources to establish notability and trying to make the page better and theroadislong has just been deleting everything as fast as I can load it up. The page has been butchered. He refers to my editing as 'ridiculous' and 'trumpery.' I have stayed polite. Lindsay is a world expert on Stolen Art and has written the definitive work on the subject. He has consistently stood up for women artists who are underrepresented in museums and whose prices are a fraction of male artists work. It would be interesting to ask him to do a page on this for Wikipedia also, maybe for the WomeninRed project. He goes on the radio talking about issues such as the Elgin Marbles and Blogs and writes articles on interesting artistic matters. Art Dealers and writers are categories on Wiki and many his colleagues are there. As one of the top art dealers in the world and a well established author and journalist it is hard to see how Lindsay is not notable enough suddenly after 10 years of having a page. We will circle back to Dr Darden in due course but in the meantime can we keep Lindsay's page please. Thanks.Agnesgerlach (talk) 20:39, 25 September 2019 (UTC) Agnes Gerlach
 * Please don't make baseless accusations, your article Ellington darden was tagged for deletion by User:Daiyusha and deleted by User:Athaenara. Wikipedia has articles about notable topics that have been reported on in depth by multiple, independent reliable sources. Many of your sources do not even mention him and the vast majority of the others are his own works which are not suitable. Theroadislong (talk) 10:18, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

As I said, I seek third party input on this. And I would like an opinion as to whether Theroadislong referring to my editing as 'unsourced trumpery' and 'ridiculous' is acceptable? I had to look up 'trumpery' and Definition sites on Google say it means, "worthless nonsense, garish, vulgar, tasteless, gaudy, showy etc." Does hiding behind a fake name allow him to make comments like this with no recourse? Does he have a track record of talking to women like this?

I admit that my unpaid editing is amateur and contains mistakes but surely that doesn't mean I can be insulted. There must be guidelines on this, no?

I would like Theroadislong to be removed from editing my work. Anyone else, and I mean anyone, will do.

I will return to try and sort out Dr Darden in due course, he is old and ill, and I only wanted to add him as a distinguished alumni on the FSU website.

One thing at a time and that is to seek a third party opinion on whether Ivan Lindsay is notable enough to stay up on Wikipedia. He has been notable enough to be on Wikipedia for these last 10 years and, since he first went up, he has only become more notable with additional books, articles and journalism. The sources I have been adding to Lindsay's page include articles/mentions/quotes/interviews from The Independent Newspaper, The Guardian Newspaper, TASS, Country and Town House Magazine, Gstaad Life Magazine, Hermitage Magazine, Spears Magazine, Russianartandculture platform, York Festival of Ideas, Matryoshka Radio, and a list of Lindsay's own books and articles. Lindsay's writing and blogging attracts a wide readership because he takes a view on controversial subjects such as:- Why are women so underrepresented in Museums?/ What are women artists worth so much less than men?/ Is the most expensive painting in the world, Leonardo's Salvator Mundi, a fake?/ Is Contemporary art a Ponzi scheme?/ Are the English aristocracy irrelevant?/ Where do all the stolen masterpieces end up? and so on.

While the Lindsay page is on trail, and awaiting execution, I will continue to add more sources and tidy it up if someone can please stop Theroadislong from butchering it. Agnesgerlach (talk) 14:37, 26 September 2019 (UTC)Agnes Gerlach
 * This is not the appropriate place for these comments. You can read about third opinions here Third opinion or ask for help at Teahouse. The sources you have mentioned are his own writings, they are not independent sources and are of no use for establishing notability. Theroadislong (talk) 14:47, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Surely it is appropriate when discussing a writer to list his books and articles as I have done? And saying the sources mentioned are his own writings is just not true.   Where Lindsay is interviewed by Country and Town House Magazine, Tvoya Istoriya, Russianartandculture, Russian News Agency TASS, Matryoshka Radio (Russian Language) etc these are not Lindsay's own writings. Would these people be wanting to interview someone who wasn't notable?  Where he is quoted in the Independent and participates in the York Festival of Ideas it is not his own writings. When he chairs panel discussions and judges the Design for London awards it is not his own writings. The Mensa Society invited Lindsay to be the lead speaker at their Annual Conference at Cambridge University in 2008. And then encouraged him to enlarge the talk into a book...which he did(The History of Loot and Stolen art). Speakers are selected by Mensa members (who have an IQ at or above 98% of the population) for being notable in their relative field.  Nobody gets to lecture there who isn't notable.  The theme of the Conference was the 7 deadly sins and Lindsay was invited to speak on Greed as he is an expert on Stolen Art.  When he is invited to lecture in London, Washington, Moscow and elsewhere it is because the people inviting him to speak think he is notable.  Would the magazines quoted who asked Lindsay to write for them have done so if they didn't think he had something interesting to say?  Would Lindsay get all his books published if Publishers did not believe people wanted to read his work? Lindsay is notable in several of Wikipedia's categories incl. businessman, writer and journalist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agnesgerlach (talk • contribs) 21:47, 26 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment Interviews are not considered suitable sources and 26 of the article's sources are to his own work. Theroadislong (talk) 22:03, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete The long list of references for stuff he has written or interviews of him do not justify the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs) 21:23, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment We need to bring this back on-topic (and perhaps collapse some of the above comments). I have just reviewed the article in the context of this accusation made by Agnesgerlach at the Teahouse of rudeness against for using words like 'trumpery and 'ridiculous' to describe deletion edits to this article. I find the article so replete with unverifiable, puffed up statements, that extracting any reliable evidence of Notability to be almost impossible in its present state. I am not suggesting blowing it up and starting again, rather, that all unsubstantiated and over-egged statements (see two masterclass examples in my Teahouse response) probably need weeding out before anything notable and verifiable can be found. If it's there, I invite  to focus on that and to bringing it to the fore by deleting the remaining unsubstantiated and/or over-egged waffle which serves this person no good whatsoever. I feel this is now a task for another day, and possibly for other editors to perform. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:46, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Enough puffery-pruning has now been done for me to express my view that this person does not meet our WP:NBIO criteria. That said, I'd be keen to change it if evidence can be brought forward to show that their work/writings have had a significant, wide impact in their sphere of influence. If so, please ping me. Other that that, this is merely a curriculum vitae of an art historian. Nick Moyes (talk) 03:01, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't show WP:BASIC. He is quoted in some WP:RS, but that's not what is wanted. Spear's Wealth Management Survey seems a decent publication, but writing in it doesn't directly help in this context. Being written about in it would. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:42, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Save looking at Wikipedia's guidelines for Notability and Biography it says that People are likely to be notable where they 'have made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field.' Or that they are responsible for, 'originating a significant new concept,' or that they 'played a major role in creating a significant body of work." I would like to propose that Lindsay satisfies these criteria in at least 3 specific fields:-1.  Looted art.  Lindsay has written the only book (The History of Loot and Stolen Art, from antiquity until the present day), which covers the major looting episodes through history from ancient times up until the present day.  He examines the origins of Looting with the Romans, and traces theft through the Crusades, Vikings, Spanish colonization of the Americas, Frances Drake, The Swedes, Cromwell, Napoleon, Greece, Elgin, Punitive expeditions against the Ashanti/Benin, Hitler and so on.  He looks at the what they stole, where it is today and examines the motivation of the looters.  He suggests that pursuing Loot and Art was in fact the primary  motivation behind the expansionist plans of many of History's greatest warlords.  For example, Alexander the Great looted to avoid bankruptcy and pay his army, the Vikings for personal gain, Napoleon to fill the Louvre and Hitler to make a museum in his home town of Linz that would surpass all European museums.  This idea calls for a rewriting of history and has been considered sufficiently interesting to warrant Lindsay being invited to lecture at outfits like the Mensa Society at Cambridge, York Festival of ideas, the Capital Speakers Club in Washington and so on.  The book is usually quoted when anyone starts seriously looking at Stolen Art and and Lindsay is considered a world expert on the subject.2.  Russian art of the mid 20th Century.  Lindsay spent 10 years in and out or Russia researching this topic, meeting artists, museum curators and archivists.  In the West, Soviet art is mainly considered Propaganda produced for the Soviet Government.  But the Russian's don't believe that and are of the opinion that amongst the Soviet Kitsch there were some excellent painters and sculptors that they have collected and display in the Russian museums.  With exhibitions, 6 books, many articles, lectures and panel discussions Lindsay is attempting to change Western thinking about the period.  For a review of one of the key books in this series, Masterpieces of Soviet Painting and Sculpture, Unicorn Publishing Group, 2016, from Craig Owen Jones of POP Matters see: -  3.  Lindsay's most recent book 'Soviet Women and their Art, the Spirit of Equality' is an even more obscure subject for the West although a subject which resonates in the age of ME:TOO.  After the Russian Revolution of 1918, The Soviets declared men and women equal and women, with considerable help from Soviet female activists, for a time, received rights that were ahead of the those held by women in the West at the time.  Immediately after the Revolution, the Bolsheviks passed legislation to emancipate women. In quick succession the Bolsheviks legalized abortion and divorce, made cohabitation socially acceptable and replaced religious marriage with a simple registration procedure.  Such measures were designed to liberate women from male domination and to allow them to choose to join the workforce over raising a family. How this story unfolds is examined through the eyes of women artists and sculptors.  How some of these ideas were more influential on women's rights in the West, than has been previously recognized, is examined in the book.  Lindsay produced and co authored this book while inviting other leading experts in this field to participate such as Rena Lavery, Dr Natalia Murray, Dr Katia Kapushesky and Dr Elizaveta Butakova.Leaving aside Lindsay's body of articles, lectures, panel discussions etc, in these 3 subjects Lindsay has undoubtably made a widely recognized contribution that will become part of the enduring historical records of these particular (and very young) fields of research.  None of these 3 subjects have been studied in this way before.  They are not mainstream subjects that attract a mass of reviews and discussion but the original ideas put forward, gained from painstaking primary research in remote places, will slowly filter in to the mainstream over the years.I acknowledge this article was loose and needed editing at the beginning of this rewrite, but this was due to inexperience, and all the fluff has now been extinguished just leaving the facts.   The Mensa Society, the Universities where he has lectured, the magazines and publishers who publish his work, and his readership all think he is notable and I ask Wikipedia to reconsider deleting his page, particularly as these are interesting subjects where he is trying to advance Western Knowledge.Agnesgerlach (talk) 17:17, 30 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment I am one of the above Deletes (I forgot to sign), but want to state here that where he lectured and what he published is not enough if people have not written ABOUT HIM. If this happens in the future, then an article can be written about him then. I cut some more chaff, but it's like first time with an artichoke - no idea if there is anything of value in the center. David notMD (talk) 19:13, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Save <--[struck dup !vote] "No idea if there is anything of value in the center?" Hmmmm. Lindsay's last 3 books were launched with signings at Waterstones, Piccadilly and Hatchards (last 2). Not many authors get invited to launch their books at these venues.  Other authors who have recently been invited to Hatchards include Andrew Roberts/Boris Johnson/Diane von Furstenberg/ A.N. Wilson/Charles Moore/William Dalrymple. You say people should be writing "ABOUT HIM" to make him notable.  I can't agree, his notability as an author is about his writing... which is original, adds to Western Knowledge in at least 3 distinct areas, and is attracting excellent reviews. As previously referenced Wikipedia advises that any biography is notable if "The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field."  It doesn't say anything about requiring people to write "ABOUT HIM."  Well, nobody is disputing that Lindsay has made a contribution so I suppose this hangs on an interpretation of "widely recognized."  As such I have added the details about the book launches,  a couple of reviews and I am now looking for more. That is... until I get removed as a Wikipedia editor.  Having had the temerity to question the language used by Theroadislong when referring to my editing I have a feeling my days are probably numbered.Agnesgerlach (talk) 01:27, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Please only WP:!VOTE once in a discussion. If you want to clarify or change an earlier comment you made, you may do so per WP:REDACT. If you want to respond to a comment made by someone else, you may also do so per WP:AFDFORMAT. You shouldn't, however, begin each new comment with bolded "Save" or "Keep". It might also be a good idea to use this AFD's talk page for any detailed discussion (such as about sources, etc.), you'd like to have with others commenting here. AFD pages which evolve appear to be long walls of text can be hard to sort through for a closing administrator.So, you can use the talk page for really detailed discussion and then simply refer to said discussion on this page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:42, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. My university library has a number of his books and he has some notable publications in journals. It's very possible that their are some Russian language sources that would better support the article. However, the article does not have enough independent sources to meet the criteria at WP:SIGCOV and therefore the article fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 18:23, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Ivan fails WP:BASIC as there is no multiple significant secondary coverage in reliable sources. I found this, but it's an interview so it's WP:PRIMARY. Also a review of his work , but certainly not enough. The references in the article include unreliable blogs, WP:ROUTINE events announcements, his works/quotations of what he said/WP:PRIMARY, not even mentioned in some, passing mentions, or bio listings. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 11:14, 5 October 2019 (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.