Talk:Malaya Sadovaya (painting)

Conflict of interest

This is a never-ending conflict of interest account, here writing an article about a painting that the author used to illustrate the cover of one of his books. In a triumph of circular logic, in the Wikipedia article he then refers to it as one of the most famous landscapes of Leningrad, by virtue of its use on the cover. JNW (talk) 21:19, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Apparently I'm inexplicably prone to nervous reactions [1] when I see someone using the cover of their own book in an article, taking credit for their contribution to an artist's renown--the word I'm searching for is chutzpah. JNW (talk) 22:20, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Instead of discussing the article and the facts are invited to discuss their biased interpretation. Didactic tone and insulting language against the author of the article could not been accepted as arguments. The facts are as follows. 1. We have an article about the famous painting by famous russian artist, which confirms the links to authoritative sources. 2. The painting was known for authoritative exhibitions and publications prior to its publication in the book «Unknown Socialist Realism. The Leningrad School». 3. Putting image of picture on the cover of the book speaks about the recognition of its artistic merit and made ​​the famous painting a much wider range of people. These are facts that are supported by references to the sources. Leningradartist (talk) 19:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

But you're so insistent on referencing your publications, Mr. Ivanov, in this case adding an image from the cover of your book which is gratuitous, given that only one version of the painting is sufficient. And the statement "(it) also was placed on the dust jacket of this album, released in Russian and English languages​​, making it one of the most famous landscapes of Leningrad - Petersburg of the second half of 20 Century" is an unsourced claim that further self-references in a flattering way. This issue was rather thoroughly explained last year. It is at least a conflict of interest, and looks like a promotion of your own publications. I submit that it is entirely possible to write articles about these artists and their work without using your own books as sources. Period. JNW (talk) 00:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

English native speaker needed?

This article needs more edits from an English native speaker, or someone stronger in English. The grammar and word usage is wrong in a number of places. I did make a few edits to help out, but I'm bored now :D

Added Cleanup Tag

For obvious reasons.... - Nic — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.72.66.74 (talk) 13:59, 6 June 2013 (UTC)