Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Nick Gabrichidze

Quotes from delete page discussion: "*Keep I was registerred on Vicipedia to support the  talented artist Nick Gabrichidze. I much like its artistic manner, its style.  In his works the soft harmony of undertints, tenderness of colour were dominanted by contrasting and a local colours, and the musical harmony of lines by accuracy and laconicism of the painting. http://games.wildofporn.com - my faivorit artistEll20 18 : 53 pm, 18 June (UTC)

"*Keep I was registerred on Vicipedia to support the  talented artist Nick Gabrichidze. Its pictures very beautiful. I much like its artistic manner, its style.  In his works the soft harmony of undertints, tenderness of colour were dominanted by contrasting and a local colours, and the musical harmony of lines by accuracy and laconicism of the painting. Nick - my faivorit artist

Ell 17 : 40 pm, 18 June (UTC)

About inserting the images at Plato, Flying Dutchman or other pages
Unofficial note:Dear Irpen we appreciate your support(and especially support from user:sparkit who seems to be a professional in art research and surrealism history; even if page will be removed his opinion is very valuable for us) But there is something you have mentioned which we sincerely do not understand: I would understand someone voting against keeping this page here, but what's wrong with contributing images of Nick Gabrichidze as an illustration to other articles? Would wikipedia have ton's of image data to illustrate the content and would we remove some other images to insert ours the frustration of wikipdians would be acceptable. But what is the objection against inserting some attractive graphical material to the pages which used to be absolutely image-empty, with just a plain text? I mean we can remove those images, but what's a point to contribute something at all to this resource then if every new contribution would be seen as insolence? Seriously why not to assume some good faith?

Would we put let's say image of mural with Bob Marley or the Pop art style image to the Plato page it would be idiocy and vandalism. But what was put there is a accurate reflection of "Plato’s cave" concept, the allegory created by Plato himself. It is not an abstract work which requires some extra understanding, it is a figurative image which is displaying the concept accurately. Same for other images-if wikipedians do not see how image of "Mermaids" at the "mermaid" page is connected with a content, please tell us what’s wrong. May be you will convince us and we will reconsider. Some people claim that images of "more notable paintings" should be put there. Fair enough, but so far no one bothered to find and put any image as far as we see. We are inserting something we consider interesting, and if someone has more interesting image-please offer it, we will be glad to see. But how can user be sanctioned for adding obviously topic related visual material to the content? If the fact that artists name is present on each image is irritating for you, then please note that it is not only acceptable but absolutely necessary for copyright reasons. I hope we made our motivation clear, but if there is another opinion please share it with us.

Honestly removing this page would be not pleasant but at least understandable. But aggressive and hostile (and in some extreme cases even vicious) reaction in response our attempts to contribute some visual material for this recourse is really a shock. We will appreciate any help in cleaning up the Nick Gabrichidze page according to the Vikipedia standards, if someone can place a request for it will be more then appreciated. Authors 12 : 36 June 21, (UTC)


 * Note, i already removed some self promotion on Online journalism, Geopolitics, Public art, Pop art, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Graffiti , Herman Brood, Mural, and Mermaid. Even if this page survives VfD, he is way to infamous for the vast majority of these articles. I also removed his request on Requested articles/Culture and fine arts for Gabrichidze Nick. -- Chris 73 Talk 13:19, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * He has added a lot of the pics again. --Chris 73 Talk 13:49, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * If he keeps it up a block might be in order. 172 16:36, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Note: Adding content to wikipedia is not a vandalism. However removing some of the content without any explanation, and respect for a people who contributed their time and efforts to make wikipedia a better place may be consider as such.

Please see :Policies_and_guidelines Vandalism

Key policies

Quote:"Respect other contributors. Wikipedia contributors come from many different countries and cultures, and have widely different views. Treating others with respect is key to collaborating effectively in building an encyclopedia. For some guidelines, see Wikipedia etiquette, Wikipedia:Writers rules of engagement, Wikipedia:Civility, Dispute resolution"

See also:Editing_policy

However if you would propose changing those rules and, in case of success, will get back to us with your proposal to remove al content we have added to this recourse we will consider it seriously.:

We consider that the images we offered to on-line journalism, Plato and geopolitics page contribute to those articles graphically. You have another opinion but you do not offer any other image to be considered. If you think those images don’t belong there please take your time to explain your opinion, we may find some compromise. When images have been removed from some other threads we politely asked why did it happen so we could negotiate some other solution, or even offer some other image, may be not Nick Gabrichidze's. For a time being here is no response. Well then your opinion is counted as your private opinion. Copy of this message will be posted at the threads where images are returned. If you will keep removing those images without any explanation the page protection request will be filed. If disputeabout removing the images illustrating the artickle only on the basis of someones personal taste will not be solved an arbitration for resolving dispute maybe considered. If you will bother to talk (and respect opponents arguments) about graphic content of wikipedia, about why you object this particular image(forget about author) we may find some reasonable solution. Otherwise we will keep our opinion and you keep yours. We appreciate your understanding. Authors of the artickle including user Gabrichidze(not Nick Gabrichidze the artist) 11:19 pm, Amsterdam June 20.

Recent publications written by Nick Gabrichidze
(in Russian regarding the european reaction to the attack on the theater in Moscow in 2002)

&#8220;Moskovsye novosti&#8221; n.42 29/10-4/11 2002 ;

http://www.mn.ru/issue.php?2002-42-24

N. Gabrichidze &#8220;Katinki v Televizore&#8221;

Note : Please feel free to re-edit the original artickle using this information if you feel that it is neccessay, but note: we do not want to see too many media links at the artickle, otherwise it may look like a resume or advertisement. You can also include the above shown images in other articles in wikipedia if you feel that they fit there; only with a mention of copyright holder (Nick Gabrichidze) and links to the Nick Gabrichidze page

The list is not complete and may be extended Authors 12:41, 15/07/2005 Amsterdam Etited(new information added) at 13:00; 15/07/2005 Amsterdam, Authors

NoteCopiright to all images belongs to Nick Gabrichidze; Authors 12 : 43 Amsterdam 15/07/2005
 * If the copyrights are being held by this person, then they may not be here, as they have not been released to GFDL and their appearance here is a copyright violation for each image. RickK 22:58, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Note: ''The copyright is not held by the person(s) who wrote the artickle; please do not confuse user name "gabrichidze" and phisical person and great artist Nick Gabrichidze. The copyright is held by artists Nick Gabrichidze from Amsterdam. Pictures are released here under the "fair use" which is how most art images are used by wikipedia.Images are publically available at the Internet, sourse is available at the each image file. Copyright holder agrees to have his images displayed at wikipedia under "fair use" rules so talking about copyright violation from a third uninvolved party is .. hmmm absolutely irrelevant(unless you claim hat YOUR copyright was violated, which is not the case) Please avoid copyright paranoya(scheck wikipedia to find out what it is)'' Authors

Note for administrators: we encountered a problem editing the page recently. The error saying "Valid document was not found in the cache and only-if-cached directive was specified" shows up each time we are trying to edit or format recent posts. This is written from a remote computer. Authors 12:46 15/07/2005 Amsterdam

Important note regarding notability
To solve the notability issue here is a list some media responses which are currently available to us:

Article in the Dutch artistic weekly BBK krant &#8220;Kuns of decoratie&#8221; by Nico Klaus (N229, sept 1997)

Article in &#8220;Het Parool&#8221;(see Nick Gabrichidze)

Article in &#8220;The Journal&#8221;, Newcasle &#8220;Why Nck has Newcasle not Georgia, onhis mind&#8221; by Paul James Nov 11, 2004. Meant to be a promotion for Nick Gabrichidze&#8217;s public art projects in UK(typical corporate media idiocy full of babes, football, and &#8220;coolness&#8221; but still focusing on artistic side of Nick too)

Please note: only a specific essays and articles focused exlusevely about Nick Gabrichidze art are mentioned above. The routine interviews or reports from openings, or announcements are not mentioned. There were numerous radio and TV appearances in of that kind UK and Europe, including CNN &#8220;art club(by Cathy Worst)long ago(august 1998) but they are definitely difficult to track, so you may either disqualify that statement or accept it.

Most recent TV appearance(minor) was at 30/05 Nederland 3; 20.30 &#8220;In geheel Europa&#8221; talkshow Mon ; Nick Gabrichidze was invited through his own political party  PvdA. However most list of most notable public art projects, which attracted most media and public attention is also included. Please see the list below:


 * 0.Upcoming project: Amsterdam, in the building of Holland Casino(verifiable http://www.hollandcasino.nl/nl/vestigingen/amsterdam/kunstplein_5?ie=1 at this link or by calling Holland Casino Amsterdam, ask for art projects curator Mr. van den Bogh


 * 1.Public arts project called &#8220;Fucked up&#8221;(Tutle is removed from an official promotion material) in Amsterdam&#8217;s public library (http://www.oba.nl) at Princengracht 587 8 April &#8211; 3 June 2002; veritable by calling their management for inquiry and asking for details(ask to check by the dates, because of controversial title ;). The media responses and video files with a reports about opening(Dutch and some BBC day-time report if we are not mistaken are available in the library archive upon request


 * 2.[[Image:Foyerhoreca.jpg|thumb|right|150px]][[Image:Polanen2.jpg|thumb|left|75px]]Millennium project in the foyer of Amsterdam&#8217;s &#8220;Polanentheater/theater&#8221; academy created at the summer 2000 and still standing. (http://www.polanentheater.nl). Verifiable by visiting the location Mon-Sat at (welcome to Amsterdam, artistic capital of Europe. Address: Polanenstraat 174, Amsterdam. Note &#8211; the location was chosen die to it&#8217;s artistic significance, because interior there was design by Berlage. Apparently the change of interior provoked the public discussion but was definitely accepted due to the decision of Amsterdam city counsel and advice from Dutch ministry of culture (verifiable in the same theater) (visual informaion may appear shortly)


 * 2[[Image:Rockland outside.jpg|thumb|left|100px|The mural in Amsterdam]] The mural at the centre of Amsterdam(featured at the Nick Gabrichidze article page)which is used for numerous postcards, posters, flyers etc. Verifability: visiting a location at Raadhuisstraat 8 Amsterdam of any hip gift shop in Holland(also some other countries)


 * 3.[[Image:Bavaria cowboy.jpg|thumb|left|200px|The complete change of interior at the &#8220;Bavaria&#8221; building in Amsterdam regarding the Gay Olympics in summer 1998;building was used as a main venue for the event. Currently called &#8220; Pool and snooker centre &#8220;Old Zuid&#8221;. Verifyable by visiting the location van Ostadestraat 97 Amsterdam(Welcome to Amsterdam, cultural capital of the World); media reports are available in their archive as well]][[Image: Bav3.jpg|thumb|left|235px|additional image from bavaria project]][[Image:Bavara2.jpg|thumb|left|135px|Additional image from bavaria project]][[Image: Bav4.jpg|thumb|left|135px|additional image from bavaria project]][[Image:Bav5.jpg|thumb|left|145px|additional image from bavaria project]]

Note:Mikkalai you are not about conspiracy theory, aren't you? Anyway please carefully read the note above (2:03pm Amsterdam time) which may help you to destroy your worries or at least to reduce the level of your suspiciousness.. After all your commitment to destroy this article also does not look very healthy to us, but as we have said it's free encyclopedia. Authors, 7:47 pm,Amsterdam, 14/07/2005

Note Actually, one can find an element of astroturfing here as amatter of fact,but I doubt it is possible to make any step forward in arts, politics or journalism without p/r campaign now days(or philosophically seeing may be it was like that ever and always). Could be in that the difference between George Bush and pizza guy around the corner(your post from 15:29, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ) is that Bush had done astroturfing and pizza guy has not (another difference is that pizza guy is doing something actually useful: joke). But from another hand you admitted yourself that previously you had no big interest in arts and entertainment and came here purely out of frustration with our little "caucasophobia" dispute(23:28, 13 Jun 2005 ), so living in the glass house.. Anyway there are nice discussion boards(may be you can suggest some) where we can discuss the importance and consequence of astrotufing in politics, arts and culture; and difference between science and arts in that matter, but let's not start philosophical dispute here OK?. Authors, 8:03 pm, 14/07/2005 Amsterdam Typo's corrected 8:06

The important update regarding verifability of this artckle was made. Please see the note above marked as important note
Please check the new information before voting Autors; 1 : 39 am Amsterdam time; 14 June 2005

Note: Most of the galleries, funs, journalists and art collectors associated with Nick Gabrichidze received the invitation to visit (and edit) Nick Gabrichidze at wikipedia then the page was created. After the article was put for VfD, many members of Nick Gabrichidze related mailing lists have received an invitation to cast he vote here at this thread; and also to contribute for other sections of wikipedia of course. Since the mistake with verifabity was corrected yesterday, the original dispute seems to be solved and page seems to be improved enough to stay ( it is not upon us to decide though ). However if some of the people who already received an invitation to participate in the discussion still want to cast the vote, then please do so below. We are always interested what is the public opinion about Nick Gabrichidze &#8217; s art and what can be improved. Even if you vote &#8220;Delete&#8221;; it&#8217;s a free encyclopedia after all... However we kindly request to motivate your vote with more then one word''. Autors; 2:03 pm Amsterdam time; 14 June 2005