Talk:Anna Leporskaya

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Russia: Visual arts Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the visual arts in Russia task force.

Women artists

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women artists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women artists on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women artistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women artistsTemplate:WikiProject Women artistsWomen artists articles

"the painting [...] was damaged by an unknown vandal"[edit]

It's confirmed to have been a security guard now. I believe it's unfair to simply call him a vandal; that word implies malicious intent, but this guard was just bored, ignorant of workplace rules and probably not specifically intending to ruin the art (if he was, he would certainly have done much more to that painting). Sources from before the confirmation call him a vandal, yes, but blindly following them to the letter is again unfair and goes against common sense.

Most of enwiki has forgotten this by now, but the creators of Wikipedia did not intend for it for it to be a place where guidelines and sources are dogmatically followed at all times like we're in the military. Glades12 (talk) 16:47, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Glades12 -- I have made further edits to tighten the article's wording, as the text was derived from news articles which were superseded by later ones. I do think it's fair to call the individual who damaged the paintings a vandal: the word is defined as "a person who deliberately destroys or damages public or private property" and the security guard, by all reports, deliberately added ink to a painting, damaging it. He did not trip and fall, nor was he mistaken about the facts. He caused damage (however negligible) to a painting with his ballpoint pen. Anyways, if there's anything else that needs adjusting, let me know, or go ahead and take a stab at it! RexSueciae (talk) 02:38, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]