What is Reddit's opinion of Kiselev's Geometry, Book I. Planimetry?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

I think this is a very, very good point. Looking at Kiselev's Geometry really surprised me. If I remember correctly, this was a soviet high school geometry text, and by the end of it the student is supposed to know things like how to draw 4-d figures (which, until that point, I didn't even think was possible)

I took a geometry course a couple of quarters ago that was sort of a review of high school geometry, except rigorous and proof-oriented. According to my prof, Kiselev's Geometry is the absolute best book available for this approach to the subject.

The 'classic' is Kiselev's books, which all Russian students learned from for many decades.

This has turned out to be a much more interesting question than I had thought it would be. It seems to be unexpectedly hard to find a good, short book on Euclidean geometry. Most of the really good books are advanced treatments that have a lot more to say than what you probably want. Anyway, there is a good discussion of this question on mathoverflow. It appears that Kiselev is a pretty good choice. Hartshorne might be good as a guide to learning straight from Euclid (and lots more besides). I don't know how far you really want to go with this project. It might be enough to just get a taste of how the whole synthetic geometry program is organized.

By the way, you know about libary.nu, right?