Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Actaeon mauled by his hounds

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. Black Kite (talk) 09:02, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actaeon mauled by his hounds

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It was first noticed at the Village pump on the French-language Wikipedia that Nyflod (talk · contribs) creates images and articles about curiously unknown works by well-known painters: on the English Wikipedia so far

Actaeon mauled by his hounds,
Saint Barbara Tondo (Parmigianino),
Head of a Woman with Turban (Guido Reni),
Saint Sebastian (Lorenzo Lippi).

Then the Village pump found that Actaeon mauled by his hounds (File:ATTEONE SBRANATO DAI CANI 001.jpg) is the same scene as The Death of Actaeon (File:Actaeon.jpg) and, according to many details, can be identified as the painting auctioned in Budapest in 2009 for a starting price of 196€ ($261) with the title "Diana, hunting" (in Hungarian: Diana a vadászaton) and attributed to "unknown author, 19th century" (Ismeretlen XIX. századi).

WP:GNG "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" does not seem to be satisfied, since the sources given are general sources about the painter, some of them very ancient, and it remains to be shown that any of them mentions "Diana, hunting" aka "Actaeon mauled by his hounds" and not only "The Death of Actaeon". A possible indication of the wrong use of sources is the fact that, according to the article The Death of Actaeon, the letter sent by Titian to Philip II of Spain in June 1559 says that one of the two paintings he had started deals with this theme, but then the article Actaeon mauled by his hounds also mentions this letter as if he had started two pictures with the same theme (or as if "The Death of Actaeon" in the National Gallery was not one of them and maybe not even by Titian?), apparently in order to support the attribution to Titian. The article in fact looks like a synthesis WP:SYN to prove "a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources", that is, the attribution to Titian.

The corresponding deletion procedure has also been started on Commons and on the Italian-language Wikipedia. Oliv0 (talk) 12:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:03, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to The Death of Actaeon. While I think that WP:BKCRIT#5 can also be applied here (= any work of Titian is notable because it's Titian), I don't see a reason not to put all the information together for what seems to be two copies of the same painting. (Someone more knowledgeable than I am can correct me if I'm wrongly assessing the situation vis-à-vis the relationship of the two paintings.) –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:15, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The auction house says "Actaeon mauled by his hounds" is not a work of Titian, the article says it is but does not link this assertion to any exact reference that could be checked. Oliv0 (talk) 15:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
However it does seem like the information in the article (when Titian decided to paint the subject, etc.) is about the actual Titian painting - am I reading it right? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:36, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes and the actual Titian painting is "The Death of Actaeon" if the Hungarian auction house is right. This would not leave much text about "Actaeon mauled by his hounds" in the article, though the part still to be translated from Italian compares both paintings and tries to suggest that they are both by Titian (maybe even that the National Gallery one is not by Titian? difficilmente credibile come l'ultimo lavoro "hardly believable as the last work"). Oliv0 (talk) 17:33, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your point about the sketchiness of the auction house as a source. However, what I am arguing is that, as far as I can tell, most or all of the other sources in the article are about the actual Titian painting, and that's the sort of information that should be in the right article, rather than being deleted. Am I being more clear now? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:46, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Moving information to The Death of Actaeon and correcting Actaeon mauled by his hounds to say it is a copy would make this discussion more clear, but it is not an easy task:
some information (theme, series, still in his studio (unfinished?) at painter's death) seems to come from the first external link in The Death of Actaeon, the National Gallery catalogue (including the video and the link "Titian’s ‘poesie’ paintings"), but this is just expanding The Death of Actaeon using a source it already gives, and directly using the source would make the information better,
Done in The Death of Actaeon, please improve my writing style if necessary. Oliv0 (talk) 07:02, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
the description as "raw" and "first draft" is not to be moved,
the rest is only the history (places, purchases) after the painter's death and is not linked to a source, so this would be unverified information in The Death of Actaeon, and moving all references there would result in most if not all of them being irrelevant,
in a controversial context, it is not recommended to use indeed "sketchy" information in order to say Actaeon mauled by his hounds is a 19th century copy (the auction house looks rather big and serious among those in Budapest but it is not one of the biggest in the world with the best experts), though leaving the attribution to Titian through WP:SYN from unspecified sources is not better. Oliv0 (talk) 07:39, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete We are clearly looking at two different paintings here, and I don't see good sourcing for the provenance of the second or even an indication in any of the supposed sources that there are two paintings (no page numbers, sources universally in Italian— a Titian work would be catalogued in English as well if it existed). A Hungarian auction house is not a good enough source for the existence of two versions of the same work, and given the level of fraud in the art world, we must under the circumstances presume this to be a fraud. Mangoe (talk) 16:59, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but the Hungarian auction house too says this "Actaeon mauled by his hounds" is not another version by Titian and says its attribution to Titian is false, since it says it is from the 19th century. Oliv0 (talk) 17:33, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All the more reason to delete it as non-notable. Mangoe (talk) 16:18, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Remark: the Italian procedure resulted today in the deletion of the Italian article Actaeon mauled by his hounds has been translated from. Oliv0 (talk) 16:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.