Talk:Nadim Karam

You should update the link to WSI Magazine with: http://wsimag.com/art/4385-nadim-karam-urban-zoo since they updated their website domain.

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nadim Karam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.arup.com/_assets/_download/528A7A9B-0BE3-8543-448A1AB122A9543F.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130920050051/http://architecturelab.net/2011/07/the-dialogue-of-the-hills-ammanjordan-by-nadim-karam-atelier-hapsitus/ to http://architecturelab.net/2011/07/the-dialogue-of-the-hills-ammanjordan-by-nadim-karam-atelier-hapsitus/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:34, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

FT UNCITED URL
Wrt this revert I Fail to see the merit behind 'keeping' a source hidden behind PAYWALL, having an obscure address like : http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/5a55cdfe-54d2-11e2-a628-00144feab49a.html#axzz2I1itImuX And is not FULLY CITED (the citation reads "Subscribe to read Financial Times")

A reader cannot even decipher what this link even refers to. Can anyone confirm that the above URL actually does mention anything about the subject matter? In it's current state .. the FT URL is as good as an unreliable reference. As it is totally obscure. -- STC1 (talk) 05:23, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It's good to keep sources, someone may have access to it. It also does no harm, as described in WP:PAYWALL. Sources do not need to be online. For example we trust editors who go out to libraries and report that a certain claim is contained in a rare (offline) book that very few people have access to. Someone cited this FT source initially, and I would tend to trust them. Someone else with an FT subscription might verify it today, tomorrow or in 2040. --- Possibly &#9742; 05:29, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * PS search engines provide two snippets for the source: 1 "Cultural links. The political landscape of the Middle East is affecting its growing art scene in many ways. Nadim Karam's 'Untitled'(1997-2000) ..." and 2 "Nadim Karam's 'Absurd Moments' (2012) Like P21, Ayyam sees its role, as Hisham puts it, as a "catalyst and education" in bringing Middle Eastern art to a London audience.". So to answer your question Can anyone confirm that the above URL actually does mention anything about the subject matter?" yes, the article is clearly about the subject. --- Possibly &#9742; 05:44, 12 July 2021 (UTC)


 * It doesn't really matter to me, but we might as well stop putting up tags of dead links and unreliable sources on URLs, coz as it stands this URL might as much as be true to source or be dead or totally unrelated to base subject. No one will know until someone comes along, maybe in 2040, who has paid 50+$ and reads the content.. but if he/she/they doesn't cite it, we, the not so wealthy readers might never ever know what the contents are. And all we get to read on the Wikipedia page is : SUBSCRIBE TO FT(an advertisement) Thank You. -- STC1 (talk) 05:48, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no unreliable source here, and it is not a dead link. The article exists. As it so happens, the FT article is free to read, you just have to register. I did so with a throwaway mailinator.com email, and am reading it now. Will report back in 5. --- Possibly &#9742; 05:55, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I've verified the source. The article is about the gallery where he had a show, and contains the statement "Ayyam’s opening show in London will be devoted to Nadim Karam, the Lebanese artist renowned for his “urban toys” – huge, steel sculptures that he installs in public spaces – who will here show paintings that present a “playful, almost satirical perception of love and war”. It contains a large photo of the works at the toip of the article. It's a fairly minor source but fine for confirming the facts, which in this case wa the claim that he had a show there. I hope the above demonstrates why we keep paywalled sources! --- Possibly &#9742; 05:59, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * that's good to hear. Now I won't have to wait till maybe 2040 to find out if the URL is good or bad. Kindly also cite the URL appropriately, so readers who don't own throwaway mail IDs can get a glimpse of what lies behind the paywall. (PS: on my end - FT doesn't give any option for free trial login.) --STC1 (talk) 06:03, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It still requires a login. Here's the free registration link, which I jut accessed from Canada. Just to be clear, sources can be behind paywalls. There is no need to delete them in future. Thanks. --- Possibly &#9742; 06:05, 12 July 2021 (UTC)


 * - I'm still gonna need throwaway phone and email for FT, which anyways I'm not interested in. Since you have personally checked and verified the source, I see no point in my raising any concerns on it's validity. There is some pipe error showing on that reference, kindly help rectify. Thank you. -- STC1 (talk) 06:20, 12 July 2021 (UTC)