Talk:Barbara Strasen

It can easily be verified by contacting UCSD, IRS Forms
It can easily be verified by contacting UCSD, IRS Forms ... No it cannot. It is not sufficient to just say, "ask the IRS". Citations need to point to published information. Please read WP:CITE Vexations (talk) 01:56, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

And further to comments, I am going to remove what you once again added. If it is not covered in reliable, secondary sources it does not belong in a Wikipedia article, especially a BLP. Is there a conflict of interest we should be aware of here? Star  Mississippi  13:43, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Yale Summer School of Art (1962)
The article refers to the Yale Summer School of Art (1962). Is that the Yale Norfolk School of Art? If so, we probably use that name, since Yale doesn't appear to call anything the "Yale Summer School of Art". Vexations (talk) 13:59, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Group shows
I totally agree with your edit. I'd put it there as her work in that field didn't really seem to fit elsewhere either. It seems to be the field she worked in the most, but not sure where it fits unless we change the layout from broadly chronological to media she worked in. Part of me wonders whether it might fit where it talks about where her work was exhibited. Thoughts? Star  Mississippi  15:14, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , Maybe we can have a section on the themes/subjects in her work. I think we may be able to find some reviews of group shows that have included works by Strasen. I'm not at all a fan of the resume-style listing of every show (often with the odd heading "Selected group shows/exhibitions" (See for example "Selected" is a weasel word. Such lists often include shows that have received no critical attention at all. The way we should select exhibitions is by looking at the sourcing. If we can't find a source, then don't include it. I should note that this is just my opinion, and does not necessarily represent consensus: There are editors who think that comprehensive listings are useful. I think a link to the artists' own CV is easier to maintain. Nobody is going to do the work of keeping such lists up to date anyway, so they're always outdated. Vexations (talk) 16:06, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree and it also begs the question of selected by whom? What you or I thinks is important vs. User X. None of us is objectively correct, which makes deferring to secondary sources easier as well as correct per policy. Pointing out (via reference, or EL, no preference) to their resume is easier for the reader too since they can learn more about her LAX installation, or whatever else catches their fancy.  Star   Mississippi  16:25, 22 July 2021 (UTC)