Knowledge

Talk:1-54/GA2

Source 📝

637:, thanks for the review! I don't think it would serve the (relatively short) article by subsectioning the History. I considered splitting out a section on 1:54 NY but it didn't make sense in the overall history, so best to cover it in a single paragraph and continue along the general historical trajectory of the fair. I think the article is balanced for neutrality, especially given the sources. The fair's founder is a fine source for their curatorial practices and organizational history, especially when there is no source that suggest anything to the contrary. Appreciate the other comments and believe I have addressed them, if you'll have a look. Thanks again for your time! 668:, I changed the ones that I agree warranted changing (which were most of your suggestions), and I explained why I didn't change the two statements (in #4) where I disagree. I think it makes for sloppy prose to provide attribution of statements when the attribution isn't necessary, and even if you think the clarifications make for better prose, I don't see how the neutrality is compromised with those two sentences remaining the way they are, especially for the purposes of the GA criteria. 787:. I believe the outstanding items have been satisfactorily modified. As you basically did all the work of the review, I invite you to comment and choose whether to pass or fail the article. I have no reason to dispute the quality of your review besides the items for which a second opinion was requested, as the nominator seems satisfied. If you fail it I will feel obliged to take up the review, and unless I find something unexpected, it will pass. Cheers, • • • 593: 568: 535: 483: 420: 399: 363: 342: 295: 274: 215: 194: 441: 42: 650:
I don't see that my comments have been addressed, in terms of the necessary changes being made to the article. I won't make a stand on the formatting, but I do believe the remaining 2b and 4 issues require changes. If you don't agree, I can close the review so you can renominate the article and wait
324:"only art fair dedicated to contemporary African art in the primary art sector". I know this comes directly from the source, but it's a bit vague – what defines the "primary art sector"? If the term cannot be more precisely defined with sourcing, the statement should probably be dropped. 473:"1:54 NY is smaller and more intimate with an active community and different audience". The size of the event is an objective fact; the rest is editorializing by the fair's founder, and doesn't add anything to the article. 462:"organizers ask themselves 'what is necessary, what can be achieved, how do something different'". This is a statement from the fair's founder. Fair enough, but it should be couched more neutrally: "For each addition, 458:
The sources are largely favorable to the topic – that may be unavoidable, but care must be taken not to let that bias show through. In a few places, statements from sources are being taken at face value:
315:, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). 715:. I suggest you find some way of acknowledging that the opinion may be biased that makes it clear to the reader, or find an alternative neutral source providing the same opinion. • • • 730:, and as such can be taken as a fair comment on the organizers' motivation. I do not consider it necessary to change this providing the fair's founder is one of the organizers. • • • 312: 203: 240: 80: 70: 469:"African politics did not impede the selection process". That may be true, but it's coming from a biased source, which needs to be attributed in the text. 552: 753:. The first quote wasn't meant to be so declarative, as it is when separated from the second clause about visas. Rephrased to be truer to the source 244: 236: 728:"organizers ask themselves 'what is necessary, what can be achieved, how do something different'". This is a statement from the fair's founder. 228: 47: 581: 802:. Seeing the changes, I will not stop you from passing the article. The horrible taste in my mouth disinclines me to do it myself. — 232: 451: 75: 372: 351: 544: 126: 612:
Nominator refuses to fix issues which reviewer considers unresolved. Nominator is free to try again with someone else.
52: 556: 332:"a greater variety of non-niche curators" What is a niche curator? The term needs to be better defined, or removed. 304: 156: 122: 308: 224: 713:"African politics did not impede the selection process". That may be true, but it's coming from a biased source 327:"its founder received significant ideological support". This is also vague, and needs to be sourced or removed. 107: 548: 429: 259: 496: 408: 817: 791: 776: 734: 719: 99: 376: 688: 577: 282:. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with 814: 799: 788: 773: 749: 731: 716: 521: 517: 609:
Holding passage until item 2b and 4 issues are addressed, within the standard 7-day period.
525: 455:: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. 250:
Layout needs some improvement – the "History" section should be broken into subsections.
755: 693: 670: 639: 283: 171: 150: 687:... you failed the article over two sentences? Please restore the review and 803: 784: 664: 652: 633: 619: 146: 115: 17: 428:. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see 495:: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing 319:
A few statements stand out to me as needing revision or better support:
813:
I sympathise, and will deal with the formalities. Cheers, • • •
92: 820: 808: 794: 779: 761: 737: 722: 699: 676: 657: 645: 624: 160: 772:
Is there anything else you need an opinion on? Cheers, • • •
691:
instead. If another editor agrees, I'll make the change.
766:
Rather different in scope, and now a neutral statement.
134: 103: 769:
There is an ambiguous link to art fair in the lead.
204:understandable to an appropriately broad audience 464:the fair's founder Touria El Glaoui has stated, 8: 30: 164: 61: 33: 727: 712: 7: 206:; spelling and grammar are correct. 202:. the prose is clear, concise, and 24: 591: 566: 533: 481: 439: 418: 397: 361: 340: 293: 272: 213: 192: 440: 313:could reasonably be challenged 1: 553:valid non-free use rationales 466:organizers ask themselves..." 592: 567: 534: 482: 419: 398: 362: 341: 294: 273: 214: 193: 847: 700:13:03, 17 March 2017 (UTC) 677:19:47, 16 March 2017 (UTC) 658:19:27, 16 March 2017 (UTC) 646:19:19, 16 March 2017 (UTC) 625:18:53, 16 March 2017 (UTC) 284:the layout style guideline 161:18:00, 16 March 2017 (UTC) 821:17:19, 3 April 2017 (UTC) 809:16:55, 3 April 2017 (UTC) 795:16:42, 3 April 2017 (UTC) 780:06:11, 3 April 2017 (UTC) 762:00:16, 3 April 2017 (UTC) 738:17:52, 2 April 2017 (UTC) 723:17:48, 2 April 2017 (UTC) 505: 385: 254: 180: 170: 167: 711:I agree with the point 651:for another reviewer. — 580:to the topic, and have 223:. it complies with the 689:request a "2ndopinion" 390:Broad in its coverage 499:or content dispute. 373:copyright violations 352:no original research 265:no original research 407:. it addresses the 311:. All content that 603:Overall assessment 549:copyright statuses 512:, if possible, by 245:list incorporation 815:Peter (Southwood) 789:Peter (Southwood) 774:Peter (Southwood) 732:Peter (Southwood) 717:Peter (Southwood) 616: 615: 582:suitable captions 555:are provided for 371:. it contains no 89: 88: 838: 760: 758: 752: 698: 696: 675: 673: 667: 644: 642: 636: 595: 594: 570: 569: 557:non-free content 537: 536: 485: 484: 443: 442: 422: 421: 401: 400: 365: 364: 344: 343: 305:reliable sources 297: 296: 276: 275: 217: 216: 196: 195: 165: 139: 130: 111: 43:Copyvio detector 31: 846: 845: 841: 840: 839: 837: 836: 835: 756: 754: 747: 708: 694: 692: 671: 669: 662: 640: 638: 631: 227:guidelines for 225:Manual of Style 176:Review Comment 120: 97: 91: 85: 57: 29: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 844: 842: 834: 833: 832: 831: 830: 829: 828: 827: 826: 825: 824: 823: 770: 767: 741: 740: 725: 707: 706:Second opinion 704: 703: 702: 684: 683: 682: 681: 680: 679: 614: 613: 611: 606: 596: 588: 587: 585: 571: 563: 562: 560: 538: 530: 529: 503: 502: 500: 486: 478: 477: 476: 475: 470: 467: 456: 444: 436: 435: 433: 423: 415: 414: 412: 411:of the topic. 402: 394: 393: 383: 382: 380: 366: 358: 357: 355: 350:. it contains 345: 337: 336: 335: 334: 328: 325: 316: 298: 290: 289: 287: 277: 269: 268: 252: 251: 248: 237:words to watch 218: 210: 209: 207: 197: 189: 188: 178: 177: 174: 169: 140: 87: 86: 84: 83: 78: 73: 67: 64: 63: 59: 58: 56: 55: 53:External links 50: 45: 39: 36: 35: 28: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 843: 822: 818: 816: 812: 811: 810: 807: 806: 801: 798: 797: 796: 792: 790: 786: 783: 782: 781: 777: 775: 771: 768: 765: 764: 763: 759: 751: 745: 744: 743: 742: 739: 735: 733: 729: 726: 724: 720: 718: 714: 710: 709: 705: 701: 697: 690: 686: 685: 678: 674: 666: 661: 660: 659: 656: 655: 649: 648: 647: 643: 635: 629: 628: 627: 626: 623: 622: 610: 607: 604: 600: 597: 590: 589: 586: 583: 579: 575: 572: 565: 564: 561: 558: 554: 550: 546: 542: 539: 532: 531: 527: 523: 519: 515: 511: 508: 504: 501: 498: 494: 490: 487: 480: 479: 474: 471: 468: 465: 461: 460: 457: 454: 453: 448: 445: 438: 437: 434: 431: 430:summary style 427: 424: 417: 416: 413: 410: 406: 403: 396: 395: 391: 388: 384: 381: 378: 374: 370: 367: 360: 359: 356: 353: 349: 346: 339: 338: 333: 330: 329: 326: 323: 321: 320: 317: 314: 310: 306: 302: 299: 292: 291: 288: 285: 281: 278: 271: 270: 266: 262: 261: 257: 253: 249: 246: 242: 238: 234: 230: 229:lead sections 226: 222: 219: 212: 211: 208: 205: 201: 198: 191: 190: 186: 183: 179: 175: 173: 166: 163: 162: 158: 155: 152: 148: 145: 141: 138: 137: 133: 128: 124: 119: 118: 114: 109: 105: 101: 96: 95: 82: 79: 77: 74: 72: 69: 68: 66: 65: 60: 54: 51: 49: 46: 44: 41: 40: 38: 37: 32: 26: 19: 804: 653: 620: 617: 608: 602: 598: 576:. media are 573: 543:. media are 540: 513: 509: 506: 492: 488: 472: 463: 450: 446: 425: 409:main aspects 404: 389: 386: 368: 347: 331: 322: 318: 309:cited inline 300: 279: 264: 258: 255: 220: 199: 185:Well-written 184: 181: 153: 143: 142: 135: 131: 117:Article talk 116: 112: 93: 90: 81:Instructions 800:Pbsouthwood 750:Pbsouthwood 547:with their 510:Illustrated 104:visual edit 377:plagiarism 260:Verifiable 48:Authorship 34:GA toolbox 172:Attribute 144:Reviewer: 71:Templates 62:Reviewing 27:GA Review 18:Talk:1-54 746:Thanks, 578:relevant 516:such as 497:edit war 157:contribs 76:Criteria 452:Neutral 241:fiction 127:history 108:history 94:Article 551:, and 545:tagged 518:images 493:Stable 243:, and 233:layout 526:audio 524:, or 522:video 514:media 263:with 168:Rate 136:Watch 16:< 805:swpb 785:Swpb 757:czar 695:czar 672:czar 665:Swpb 654:swpb 641:czar 634:Swpb 621:swpb 307:are 151:talk 147:Swpb 123:edit 100:edit 630:Hi 432:). 375:or 819:: 793:: 778:: 736:: 721:: 605:. 601:. 584:. 574:6b 559:. 541:6a 528:: 520:, 507:6. 491:. 449:. 426:3b 405:3a 392:: 387:3. 379:. 369:2d 354:. 348:2c 303:. 301:2b 286:. 280:2a 267:: 256:2. 247:. 239:, 235:, 231:, 221:1b 200:1a 187:: 182:1. 159:) 125:| 106:| 102:| 748:@ 663:@ 632:@ 618:— 599:7 489:5 447:4 154:· 149:( 132:· 129:) 121:( 113:· 110:) 98:(

Index

Talk:1-54
Copyvio detector
Authorship
External links
Templates
Criteria
Instructions
Article
edit
visual edit
history
Article talk
edit
history
Watch
Swpb
talk
contribs
18:00, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Attribute
understandable to an appropriately broad audience
Manual of Style
lead sections
layout
words to watch
fiction
list incorporation
Verifiable
the layout style guideline
reliable sources

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.