Talk:Nepenthes (sculpture)

Reception section
I originally revised the criticism section because I felt it was unbalanced. You included 7 harsh criticisms all from the same source. Richard Speer hates the piece. We get it! No need to quote every one of his put-downs from the entire article–see Neutral point of view: Balance. Also, you do not have to put the citation after every sentence–see Needless repetition. Citing the Willamette Week article once at the end of the paragraph is sufficient. You also said, "feel free to add additional criticism" but then blithely removed the one positive criticism I did add.

I am reverting the revert and have added back my positive criticism and also added a new one. --Foobarnix (talk) 14:45, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I returned the original content and kept the newly-added content. I removed one inline citation, but really one should be provided after a direct quote. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:57, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Can we discuss here instead of going back and forth on article? I am really happy someone else is interested in this section, I just don't see the need to eliminate content from the critical reception section. Your seem to prefer the 'less is more' approach, while, I prefer the 'more is more' perspective. Thanks for your work on this article -- let's find a compromise, please. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:03, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * If you do not see that the long list of snarky criticisms–all from one source–is excessive, I have failed to make my case. I am not going to change it again.  I must say, you did a bang-up job on the rest of the article.  Must visit Portland some time to see why Speer hates the work so much.  They look very nice to me.--Foobarnix (talk) 15:58, 8 June 2015 (UTC)