Talk:Quilla Constance

Incorrectly applied conflict tag
Acousmana - why does my location matter here? Would I not be allowed to edit the page of an artist who lives in London, if I also live in London? I'm disappointed that your suspicion of my contributions actually disrupts the development of this page. You seem far more interested in enforcing laws on Wikipedia than actually improving the quality of the text content and research. Have I not provided valuable reliable sources for this artists page? Would you have added them if I had not done so? Also, please tell me which sections aren't written from a neutral point of view. I have assured you many times that I am not related directly to this artist, and you should take my words in good faith. I believe the work of Constance is valuable for many feminists and BAME activists and her work should be written about as accurately as possible on Wikipedia. The page might require contributions from an expert in conceptual art. 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:2096:52E4:4865:C481 (talk) 22:50, 11 February 2021 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:D82D:D81F:111:7644 (talk)   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:74BA:BC5:7D4:F45 (talk)
 * please try and observe talk page conventions, note the requirements in the header at the top of the page, might i suggest you cut and paste your recent responses and place them in the most recent subsection concerning the COI at the bottom of this page, any dispute resolution that might follow will take place there. It's very difficult for other editors to follow what's happening here if you do not adhere to talk page formatting standards. Acousmana (talk) 15:50, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello - I feel reluctant to continue making Wikipedia edits due to repeatedly being accused of operating with bias (even though the sources I've referenced for this page are acceptable). None of the contributions I've made are informed by my own opinion. I've merely collected available citations from reliable sources (The Guardian, BBC, British Comedy Guide and Van Abbemuseum) and added them to this page in order to improve and expand it. I also believe I'm being unfairly targeted because I'm an anonymous user, but I don't agree that a hierarchy should exist between anonymous and registered users on Wikipedia. I am disappointed that Wikipedia user (Acousmana) appears to be enforcing this type of control, which ultimately discourages and prevents certain users from contributing on equal terms. It's the quality and relevance of the user contributions which should count, and users should be judged solely on this, nothing else. However, for some reason, a conflict tag has been applied.2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:2096:52E4:4865:C481 (talk) 22:50, 11 February 2021 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:D82D:D81F:111:7644 (talk)
 * please note, at the bottom of this page, that a rationale was provided for the COI, there is no issue with being anonymous, but we have guidelines that we follow in creating content, and as an IP-editor you are expected to follow those too - this applies equally to talk pages. Acknowledge also that the editing pattern we are seeing - single purpose dynamic IP usage from a location associated with the subject - is suspicious. Please view PR_Professionals_%26_Editing also. Acousmana (talk) 12:09, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

A 'major contributor' conflict tag has been incorrectly attached to this page. The source of the statement in question in the opening of the 'style' section is verifiable through trusted websites such as ICA: https://archive.ica.art/whats-on/symposium-dis-identifications and UAL: https://www.arts.ac.uk/colleges/camberwell-college-of-arts/people/quilla-constance and a few other sites I've also just found online, including The Oxford Times.

I do not know Quilla Constance, but I am interested by her work and I have visited a few of her exhibitions. This knowledge of her work informs my Wikipedia contributions and should not be used against me! All contributions I've made to Wikipedia have been factual, accurate, objective and verifiable. Asking 'by whom' the statement was made is requesting information that is either unknown or not verifiable, and therefore cannot be stated on Wikipedia but there is verifiable evidence that the statement has been proposed. Wikipedia is not a comprehensive academic resource, and if you wish to know the name of the person who proposed the statement, why not contact the ICA? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:2096:52E4:4865:C481 (talk) 21:53, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

I've just added two citations (from ICA and UAL websites) to support the opening statement in the style section, so I am going to request that the 'major contributor' conflict tag is removed or remove it myself. There has been no breach of Wikipedia guidelines, and I can't see any reason why this tag has been applied. If you disagree with me, please explain why you have applied the tag and identify specifically what needs to be changed on this biography. Thanks, Phil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:2096:52E4:4865:C481 (talk) 22:17, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Do not remove the close relationship tag, without consensus. Your references have nothing to do with that tag.  -  FlightTime Phone  ( open channel ) 22:22, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Care to chime in here? -  FlightTime Phone  ( open channel ) 22:25, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, if someone could explain why this tag has been applied, that would be great. As mentioned, all statements I've added to this page are verifiable through reliable sources and written in neutral tone/. Furthermore the contributions from other editors also appear to work within Wikipedia guidelines. The tone of the biography is factual and neutral throughout. If you disagree, please explain which section is problematic and let me know how I should fix it - or please remove the tag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:2096:52E4:4865:C481 (talk) 22:34, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

P.S - I've already asked Acousmana to explain why this tag has been applied, but he/she hasn't given me an answer. If nobody else thinks the tag is applicable to Quilla Constance page I will request its removal or remove it myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:2096:52E4:4865:C481 (talk) 22:50, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Do not remove the tag, until you have discussed it with  It might take a few days to get a reply. -  FlightTime Phone  ( open channel ) 22:54, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I will wait two days to see if I receive a reply from Acousmana explaining why the tag has been applied. In the meantime, it would be great if someone else can step in and take a look at the Quilla Constance page. As mentioned I have used reliable citations from official organisations and press articles to support statements I've added to the Quilla Constance article. If I've done anything incorrectly it would be very helpful to know what this is and be given some advice on how to fix it. Thanks, Phil — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:2096:52E4:4865:C481 (talk) 23:08, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * well, the pattern and nature of IP editing leads me to suspect this may have been created, and is maintained by, the actual subject of the article, I've seen this a lot over the years, people do it to aid with Google SEO, self-promotion is of course natural, especially if the individual is notable, but generally it's better for such editors to identify themselves rather than edit anonymously. If there is an error, please remove the tag, just wanted to flag it in case the policies on WP:SELF are not clear.
 * as for the cites, they first need to be live, so they can be verified, and they should not be WP:SELFCITE, which may well be the case with the "it has been proposed" statement (appears to be attributable to Allen's university bio originally), it's not immediately clear if this is extracted from an artist statement or if a secondary source that stated this. Acousmana (talk) 18:37, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I have the same feeling. -  FlightTime Phone  ( open channel ) 19:00, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * thanks for you opinion on this, i guess we should take the editor on their word and remove the tag? Acousmana (talk) 22:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for your feedback. I'm not sure how to proceed here. I've already stated that I am not related to the subject, so perhaps the next point of conversation should be whether this article is written using a biased or promotional tone or whether any information has been omitted? Can you please identify any section of this article that you believe doesn't comply with Wikipedia guidelines? As for the original statement being from Allen's university bio, can you please send me a link to support this, as I've not found evidence of this statement on Oxford University website or Goldsmiths when looking just now. Are you referring to her teaching profile at UAL? I think the statement may originate from a description of Allen's exhibition at 198 Contemporary Arts in 2015, which would have been written by the curator for Allen's show, or it could have been written as a result of a curator interviewing Allen? - and this is why I stated that 'it has been proposed' rather than 'this is what Allen is doing' - I've written this in neutral language so, please explain how this is a breach of Wikipedia codes of practice, or please reword as you see fit. I'm not sure what you mean by 'cites first need to be live' - as far as I can see all citations are live for this article. I'm happy to refrain from editing if by consensus it's believed I am not doing this correctly. I've merely been using information that is available online for this artist. Should I remove the COI tag myself? or perhaps it will be best if you do it? Let me know how you think I should proceed. Thanks, P — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:1C93:404F:EAB6:E84A (talk) 19:44, 10 November 2018 (UTC)


 * 'live' as in the urls that are serving as references need to be actually functioning, a number of the ones I checked were either broken or the page was gone, so they simply cannot be used as cites, that's all, per WP:VER. The statement "proposed" appeared to be verbatim taken from the UAL page, I assumed that was the point of origination, if so, we can assume that Allen created that text, you can bet the admin staff at UAL didn't come up with it. If it's attributable to the curator, reference the person responsible ("according to"), as well as the show, so there is not confusion. Acousmana (talk) 22:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I've looked at the Quilla Constance article again and can only find two broken links - unfortunately I think this happens quite often with Wikipedia pages where information is re-archived or taken down from websites. I can remove broken links and possibly replace with new links if I'm still permitted to edit this page? but all the other links I checked were functioning. As for the source of the opening statement, on closer inspection I now think that UAL admin might actually have taken the statement from Wikipedia, rather than the other way around? I still think the source statement has come from 198 Contemporary Arts in 2015 or the ICA, through a curator, an interview with Allen or a combination of both? However, if Allen did propose this, I don't really see how that is a breach of Wikipedia rules as the article is merely claiming what has been proposed and isn't stating fact. I think it's clear that a number of organisations are in agreement that this has been proposed? Yes, we could add 'according to 198 Contemporary Arts and ICA' and then insert links to ICA, 198 and perhaps UAL and The Oxford Times, and any other gallery websites if you think this will be clearer? But am I permitted to make this edit whilst the COI tag is still active? If not, can you make the edit? Thanks, P — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:8004:D17C:A086:AAD4 (talk) 00:25, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Regarding broken links - actually I have now found a few more broken links on this page, not so much the recent citations, but some of the older ones aren't working. I can do some work to fix these and relocate links if I'm permitted to edit this page? As I mentioned earlier, this is the new link for the ICA https://archive.ica.art/whats-on/symposium-dis-identifications - this link appears to be broken earlier in the article. I expect it will mainly be a case of searching for new versions of the links that are broken. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:9CC0:1A06:9992:D746 (talk) 01:37, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

And here's the new link for the Arts Council England award records http://gotlottery.uk/eastern/bedford/bedford/?s=name&page=5 - Perhaps you or another editor can update the broken link with this version? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:9CC0:1A06:9992:D746 (talk) 01:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I had looked through a number of links and they did not support the cites, so they did not meet the standards of WP:VER, that's why I flagged the issues above. A lot of the cites are weak in terms of simply not being quality secondary sources, see WP:SECONDARY, a compilation of primary sources brought together using prose is actually WP:OR. Note WP:ARTIST also to enure that the requirements for this article's existence are met. Please take the time to improve the referencing using the updated links. Acousmana (talk) 01:56, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Acousmana, okay, I've found these links below. They are a combination of primary and secondary sources which seems to be standard on Wikipedia. I also did a search of wiki guidelines which says primary sources are still usable in conjunction with secondary sources, and also that primary sources are not necessarily less reliable than secondary and vice versa. Can you take a look and let me know what you think, and upload these to Quilla Constance page to replace broken links while I look for other links? You can also search for replacement links as I've just found many of these online. Thanks, P

Link 1: https://archive.ica.art/whats-on/symposium-dis-identifications Link 2: Page 4 of TW Magazine: https://www.sjc.ox.ac.uk/documents/388/1413-St_Johns-TW_mag-2016_10W1.pdf - a full page article about Quilla Constance exhibition, as reviewed in The Oxford Times, and her involvement in celebrating female students at St Johns.

Link 3: (scroll down) https://wearefierce.org/?s=Eva+meyer-Keller

Link 4: http://gotlottery.uk/eastern/bedford/bedford/?s=name&page=5 (the 6th, 7th and 8th listing down says Jennifer Allen was awarded £14,500 and £14,550 three times from Arts Council England. I expect there will be other official records of this available in public funding records and via Arts Council website.

Link 5:Equity Magazine Page 6: https://issuu.com/martinebrown/docs/equity_magazine_spring_2012 - there's quite a large article on Quilla Constance winning a case. I also found this article in Londonist which supports the statement about Equity - https://londonist.com/2011/06/in-pictures-quilla-contance-protest-performance-outside-punk-soho, and this: http://archive.westendextra.com/news/2011/jun/equity-called-over-punk-double-booking-quilla-constance-stage-street-protest-over-gig-

Link 6: If you scroll down and click on 'Artists' you will see what looks to be the official list of artists with work in David Roberts Collection. Jennifer Allen is listed towards the top. http://davidrobertsartfoundation.com/collecting/

Link 7: I currently can't find a new link for Quilla Constance Freud Museum online, but I did find this large article about Quilla Constance which discusses her work and the Electra Complex. Perhaps this could be cited elsewhere on the page? https://theoxfordculturereview.com/2016/04/15/review-qc/ - The Freud Museum piece might be archived in print, off line. I will search for this at some point when I have time. Thanks, P

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:89DC:D1C:FC7F:B43B (talk) 12:59, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * can i suggest that rather than using a dynamic IP to contribute you instead create an account and begin improving the article with the content you have highlighted above. I've flagged what i believe are valid concerns, as the primary contributor to this article it would be good if you could update the cites where required. Thanks.Acousmana (talk) 13:52, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I can create an account, but I won't be able to do this today unfortunately. I've been editing without an account for convenience and I was enjoying making contributions to various Wiki pages in this way. Suddenly there's a lot more work to do, so I'd appreciate some extra help where possible. There are other editors who've worked on this page so hopefully they can step in too. Since all editors are invited to contribute, this should be a collective effort to improve the page, especially since many of the cites are available online. I also just did a search for artist requirement guidelines, and can see Allen's work is in two major permanent art collections, namely Anita Zabludowicz and David Roberts. It also looks like there have been academic journals/texts written about her work through conferences, for example at Van Abbemuseum, which would suggest there are significant conversations being had about this. I will continue to search for citations in conference archives/books. Thanks, P — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:89DC:D1C:FC7F:B43B (talk) 14:09, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello Acousmana, I just registered for an account which was easy and quick enough, only I can't make edits on the Quilla Constance page for 4 days and I'm required to make 10 other edits to other articles before I can fix the issues on Quilla Constance page. This appears to be because someone has applied semi protection to this article. I'm not sure what the logic of doing this is - but just letting you know I can't do anything on it for a while unless semi protection is lifted. Thanks, P. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RainDance90 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Acousmana & Sinebot- I've also been trying to edit this page but what's with the protection until 18th? I can't access to edit either Anyway, here's an academic review of her work published through Van Abbemuseum for 'Black Artists and Modernism' It's a significant conference about artists of colour. There's a piece on Allen/Quilla on page 15 https://mediabank.vanabbemuseum.nl/vam/files/alexandria/publiciteit/folders/2017/brochure_conferentie_conceptualism.pdf Van Abbemuseum also posted a video examining her work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9OUgICSLlI and looks like there's a more extensive piece available through a journal/ research depository. I thought it was here but can't access it atm - http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/23244/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.195.80.196 (talk) 13:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Just fixed a bunch of broken cites on this page but can't figure out how to correctly link videoWomSpram (talk) 16:53, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Each time I make a valid contribution to the Quilla Constance page, backed up by reliable sources such as the BBC, The Guardian and The British Comedy Guide, plus academic texts from Van Abbemuseum, I'm accused of having a close connection with the subject of this article. Frustratingly, the user making this accusation doesn't contribute anything of value to this page. Okay, I will refrain from editing this page even though I am knowledgable about art, and a keen observer of the work of Quilla Constance. The accusation does not make any sense. I am not breaking any Wiki rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:D82D:D81F:111:7644 (talk) 15:11, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * please look more closely at edit histories and rationales, the content you added is in the article, in the appropriate location, re:COI see the new section at the bottom of this talk page, also please place new comments at the bottom of talk threads, not the top - it runs old to new. Have a good look at WP:SOAP too, thanks.Acousmana (talk) 15:48, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2018
Hi, as per the talk section - I've been trying to explain that I don't think the issues with this page are to do with vandalism or poorly sourced links, but rather some of the links that have moved or broken over time. A simple google search allowed me to find new locations for many of the sources and some additional cites. These working links are listed on the talk page, and again below - These are a mixture of primary sources and secondary sources. Trusted primary sources have been used previously to support factual statements, and secondary sources from Oxford Mail, Oxford Culture Review, Van Abbemuseum, The Stage and Londonist are reviews.

Link 1: https://archive.ica.art/whats-on/symposium-dis-identifications

Link 2: Page 4 of TW Magazine: https://www.sjc.ox.ac.uk/documents/388/1413-St_Johns-TW_mag-2016_10W1.pdf - article about Quilla Constance exhibition, and her involvement in celebrating female students

Link 10: Review article about Allen's work https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/leisure/art/14394631.Performance_artist_Quilla_Constance_challenges_taboo_at_St_John___s_College__Oxford/

Link 12: If you scroll down and click on 'Artists' you will see what looks to be the official list of artists with work in David Roberts Collection. Jennifer Allen is listed towards the top. http://davidrobertsartfoundation.com/collecting/

Link 18: (scroll down) https://wearefierce.org/?s=Eva+meyer-Keller

Link 35:Equity Magazine Page 6: https://issuu.com/martinebrown/docs/equity_magazine_spring_2012 - Link 36: An article on Quilla Constance winning a case. I also found this article in Londonist which supports the statement about Equity - https://londonist.com/2011/06/in-pictures-quilla-contance-protest-performance-outside-punk-soho, and this: http://archive.westendextra.com/news/2011/jun/equity-called-over-punk-double-booking-quilla-constance-stage-street-protest-over-gig-

Link 37: http://gotlottery.uk/eastern/bedford/bedford/?s=name&page=5 -the 6th, 7th and 8th listing says Allen was awarded funding from Arts Council England

I also found this review which could be inserted after links 41 and 42? https://theoxfordculturereview.com/2016/04/15/review-qc/

And another editor found these links to reviews from Van Abbemuseum which could be inserted after link 43? There's a piece on Allen/Quilla on page 15 https://mediabank.vanabbemuseum.nl/vam/files/alexandria/publiciteit/folders/2017/brochure_conferentie_conceptualism.pdf Van Abbemuseum also produced a video examining her work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9OUgICSLlI 2A00:23C5:E70E:7E00:94C5:E3A:7F52:962D (talk) 14:43, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Pending-protection-unlocked.svg Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. DannyS712 (talk) 10:25, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

COI tag
Tagged this article again, second time, contributor claimed above to have no connection with artist, but the IP then, as now, is located in Bedford. Constance is a resident artist at Bedford Creative Arts, seems clear there is overlap here. Acousmana (talk) 15:07, 11 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi Acousmana, I just followed the Bedford Creative Arts link and I believe it most probably means Constance is an associate artist of this organisation, and as such could live anywhere. For example, Constance is also an associate lecturer at UAL in London https://www.arts.ac.uk/colleges/camberwell-college-of-arts/people/quilla-constance. Also, if you look on the Old Fire Station Gallery website, Oxford (scroll down) you will see she's an associate artist here too: https://oldfirestation.org.uk/working-with-artists/associate-artists/. I know a bit about art, and I should also point out that artists don't work permanently with galleries unless they are commercial, i.e- selling the artists work. Bedford Creative Arts is a community organisation, not a commercial gallery. Furthermore, even if Bedford Creative Arts were a commercial gallery, the artists could still live anywhere (even overseas) and sell work through the gallery. I'm not sure what else to say on this matter - and feel reluctant to proceed with this discussion, which appears to be going nowhere. I also just did a search for artist [Mike Stubbs] who is also listed as an artist on Bedford Creative Arts website. From what I can see, Stubbs is primarily working in Doncaster and Liverpool, and is much more likely to live there than in Bedford 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:450:9BFD:BB0A:4AEE (talk) 22:42, 15 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Mike Stubbs 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:450:9BFD:BB0A:4AEE (talk) 22:50, 15 February 2021 (UTC).


 * Also, on closer inspection - the Bedford Creative Arts link you sent does not state that Constance is a 'resident artist'! - and I feel very disappointed that you claim this to be the case. I find your choice of words to be misleading, and unfair. On these grounds I think I will need to end this discussion with you. You've clearly already decided that I'm guilty of COI, even though I've repeatedly assured you this isn't the case. I've also asked if you can please tell me which sections of Constance's article are biased, but you refuse to answer 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:450:9BFD:BB0A:4AEE (talk) 23:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC).


 * OK, thank you for your perspective on this, I feel the COI is reasonable based on the editing patterns seen over the last few years. You can request input from an impartial editor, or administrator, see WP:DR for further information. If the consensus is that the tag is unwarranted, no problem removing it. Acousmana (talk) 12:47, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I don't know how to request input from an impartial editor but would appreciate it if you'd ask someone to take a look and consider removing the tag. Regarding editing patterns - I am really interested by Constance's work and I've followed her on Facebook/Twitter for many years where she posts information about her latest projects. Also, if I notice something relevant in the news, I add it to Wikipedia. I actually made the most recent edit because I saw her on Rob & Romesh Vs Art (Sky One, 4th February ) performing with Rob Beckett and Romesh Ranganathan. Further to this, I also recall the narrater of the show stating that Constance has an art studio in east London. I presume that is where she is based 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:54AE:D783:8FD1:2544 (talk) 14:14, 16 February 2021 (UTC).


 * see here and follow the steps, it's very straight forward. Acousmana (talk) 14:30, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Okay, I've posted this in third option https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Third_opinion&action=edit&section=42A00:23C5:E705:8200:54AE:D783:8FD1:2544 (talk) 15:38, 16 February 2021 (UTC).

About the Third Opinion request: The request for a Third Opinion has been removed (i.e. declined). Issues involving conflicts of interest (including tags) are conduct issues, not content issues, and Third Opinion does not issue opinions on conduct matters. Your best resource for this is probably the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard. — TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 18:41, 16 February 2021 (UTC) (Not watching this page)


 * Okay, I can raise this on the COI noticeboard if Acousmana still feels there is an issue. I do not feel comfortable spending time fixing broken links and improving text for this page if I will keep being accused of COI. How should we proceed? 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:54AE:D783:8FD1:2544 (talk) 20:33, 16 February 2021 (UTC).

Content
I came here from the Third Opinion page. I'm afraid I can't contribute anything useful to the COI discussion.

On the other hand, I think the page can be improved in various ways. In particular:
 * The "Career" section reads too much like a CV. We don't need an exhaustive list of her performances here. We should focus on the most significant or controversial performances, and leave the rest for a list (if at all).
 * The article should be consistent about its use of Constance/Quilla Constance/Allen. Instead of repeating "Allen (as Quilla Constance)", we could just say "Allen" or "Constance" (I have no preference).
 * Apparently her identification as "biracial, working class female identity" is significant to her, in which case it should be mentioned nearer the top of the article instead of just being a report on an interview on the BBC.
 * Footnotes need to be more complete and correct. For example, this footnote:
 * is actually citing a Guardian article which has an author and a date, not just a title.
 * Other footnotes cite multi-page publications, where page numbers would be useful.
 * Other footnotes cite multi-page publications, where page numbers would be useful.

Those are my quick thoughts. --Macrakis (talk) 16:38, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Many web links are dead; it would be useful to have pointers to cached copies at archive.org if they exist.
 * Instead of the long list of performances, it would be more useful to have a summary and analysis of these works in Wikipedia's voice -- not just quotations.
 * agree with above points, personally I think WP:PSEUDONYM conventions should be followed - Allen throughout except where the text refers specifically to an in-character activity. Acousmana (talk) 16:49, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback, it's very useful. Hopefully other editors will also find cached pages for any dead links. I noticed The Stage magazine piece is now dead, but haven't checked any others recently. I also think this artist should be referred to as 'Constance' for the majority of the article since most of the work referred to on the page was delivered under this name. I also believe this is the only professional name she operates under, akin to an actor using a stage name. I'm confused about what's happening with the COI discussion though. Can the tag be removed? I feel reluctant to do any further work trying to improve this article if I'm going to be accused of COI 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:54AE:D783:8FD1:2544 (talk) 18:07, 16 February 2021 (UTC).
 * on the QC website, it states: "Quilla Constance, 'QC', is the creation of artist Jennifer Allen" and "QC is deployed by Allen to..." Would seem to support the use of Allen as the artist name, except when article text discusses performances where Allen has deployed QC and is describing actions of the persona. Acousmana (talk) 09:28, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, I see, but it appears she is always referred to as Quilla Constance in reliable sources and interviews (BBC, Guardian, Tate, New York Times, Sky One etc) so I presume this is/ has become her primary artistic name/stage name? It's probably enough just to state that she was born 'Jennifer Allen' and then created her QC persona/name which she now operates under, but I agree, for sections that refer to her work before she became Quilla Constance it's probably more accurate to refer to her as 'Allen' - but we could include a sentence to make clear that she made that work before she became known as Quilla Constance?2A00:23C5:E705:8200:1D31:710E:CBA:2147 (talk) 14:19, 17 February 2021 (UTC).


 * Allen exists, QC is an alter-ego, a vehicle, that she uses to express particular ideas in an artistic context. When she delivers lectures is she employed as Allen or QC? Similarly, in other professional contexts (non-artistic), Allen or QC? Allen, could invent another character, adopt another persona, her QC phase might end, we don't know, best to stick with Allen, unless MOS:CHANGEDNAME applies, and I don't see evidence that it does. Acousmana (talk) 14:33, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, when she lectures it appears she is employed as Quilla Constance [] and it also appears she uses the name 'Quilla Constance' when she talks at academic conferences [] - from what I have seen she only operates as Quilla Constance. I think that is one of the reasons why her work is seen as interesting and unusual. It appears she has become the persona in real life 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:1D31:710E:CBA:2147 (talk) 14:42, 17 February 2021 (UTC).


 * Correction - from what I've seen, she primarily operates as Quilla Constance, but in her earlier work her birth name'Jennifer Allen' was also sometimes mentioned. But increasingly it looks like she now only uses Quilla Constance? I attended this talk she gave at Jerwood Arts in 2020 where the host introduced her only as Quilla Constance [] Plus, I notice in the credits for Rob & Romesh Vs Art she is listed as 'Quilla Constance: herself' [] and the same with her recent BBC interview where she isn't really performing, but she is only referred to only as Quilla Constance: Artist. See transcript: https://www.bbc.co.uk/ideas/videos/how-limits-can-boost-your-creativity/p08qhyr1 - but I do find her page tricky to edit for this reason 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:1D31:710E:CBA:2147 (talk) 15:11, 17 February 2021 (UTC).


 * there are precedents, similar cases in other articles, where we follow WP:STAGENAME conventions. Per artist's website statement, there is acknowledgement that "Quilla Constance, 'QC', is the creation of artist Jennifer Allen," a creation that is "deployed by Allen" so this is our point of reference. MOS:CHANGEDNAME would alter or approach, but it doesn't apply. Acousmana (talk) 16:01, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, I see, and think WP:STAGENAME might be more appropriate, but outside of this we should also keep in mind that she is known primarily as Quilla Constance regardless of whether it's a persona or a stage name? I also just did a search for her other teaching work and noticed she is listed only as Quilla Constance on page 5 of The Royal Academy of Arts prospectus [] I think this is a strong indication of how she is known in the art world. Also, I notice that Goldsmiths only refers to her as Quilla Constance in their 2006 'selection of alumni' list (scroll down) [] even though it appears she began performing as Constance after she graduated from Goldsmiths. I will take a look at WP:STAGENAME guidelines later this week, but if you have any suggested edits for the 'Career' section that will be very useful 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:1D31:710E:CBA:2147 (talk) 16:21, 17 February 2021 (UTC).


 * Hi Acousmana I agree with your change to the arts council section but I just added 'Quilla Constance' later in the sentence because it appears the artistic content of these projects were created under her Quilla Constance name? Also I did a search for articles which confirm the year of when she became Quilla. Firstly this interview with an Asian arts patron called Shalini Passi [] see answer to first question. Also see this review written by David Roberts Art Foundation click on review number 18 [] Do these appear to be reliable sources for confirming dates of change from Jennifer Allen to Quilla Constance? and I am thinking it could be beneficial to quote from one or both of these in her article towards the top of the career section. Do you agree?2A00:23C5:E705:8200:8C17:2915:B7F5:499D (talk) 17:10, 18 February 2021 (UTC).
 * Not convinced Mash is necessarily RS, but, probably useful with regard the artist's statement re:QCs beginnings. We could place a line that notes when the QC project began. In terms of RS, same with DRAF, and similar orgnaisations, need to clear they are neutral with respect to their coverage and do not have a vested interest in promoting one or other artist (I'm guessing you can appreciate why this might be an issue?). Acousmana (talk) 11:47, 19 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi Acousmana – Have you decided what you want to do about the COI dispute you raised? Did you notice the discussion has been rejected by Third Option in COI section (Above)? they said we can discuss COI on the COI noticeboard. Although, I'm not sure what this will achieve and I think our time is better spent working together to make improvements to the article than continuing to discuss COI, given that I’ve assured you this doesn't apply, the article is neutral in tone, and I’m happy to discuss all future edits with you and other editors to arrive at the best result for the page. I also think the QC article has improved after opening a dialogue, combining our knowledge and working together. How do you want to proceed?2A00:23C5:E705:8200:8C17:2915:B7F5:499D (talk) 20:46, 18 February 2021 (UTC).
 * nothing personal, but I stand by my original assessment above, we simply can't be sure, have dealt with similar situation in past, sorry! I propose that for now we remove the tag from the article but leave the talk page instance intact. If this isn't satisfactory we can seek further input via COI noticeboard. Acousmana (talk) 11:47, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Acousmana, okay, that's fine to keep the talk page in place, and like I said I'm happy to discuss future edits with you and other editors. I think the COI section actually prefers that we approach it in this way rather than an endless conversation on the noticeboard which probably won't go anywhere unless there are problematic edits made to the article, and I don't think this applies here. I agree, the main tag should be removed because otherwise I am constantly being made to feel like I've done something wrong when I am just making an effort to develop the page so from my perspective this is unfair, but I also understand that you have a right to question editors. Let's just remove the tag, and try to work together to improve the page in future through talk page discussion where necessary 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:817A:A881:C392:A27B (talk) 13:21, 19 February 2021 (UTC).

Just added a citation for 'lecturer' in the lead sentence as this statement isn't supported elsewhere in the article, okay? And regarding COI tag I don't think I know how to remove it so probably easier for you to do it? 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:817A:A881:C392:A27B (talk) 13:51, 19 February 2021 (UTC).

Hello Acousmana I have just added some clarification to the career section based on what we discussed about her use of the Quilla Constance name. I think this helps to disambiguate the career section which refers to Jennifer Allen as well. Do you agree? 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:5009:1082:386E:8981 (talk) 16:12, 21 February 2021 (UTC).


 * have removed recent addition because of WP:OR concerns, you have made an editorial inference, none of the sources cited supported the statement made, you have to be careful about details like this. Acousmana (talk) 12:25, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for feedback – I thought we agreed there is evidence she uses her QC name when lecturing, but I now see that including that in the article could be interpreted as original research. I also agree the quote from her interview with Passi is adequate on its own and avoids potential WP:OR concerns 86.136.20.48 (talk) 14:25, 22 February 2021 (UTC).

Kind of artist
User:2A00:23C5:E705:8200:54AE:D783:8FD1:2544 brought up the question on my Talk page of whether QC is best characterized as an "artist" or as a "performance artist" in the lead. I am no expert, but I'd say that although "artist" is very broad, it generally suggests a visual artist, and might not clearly suggest that most of her work centers on her own persona, as I understand it. So "performance artist" is worth mentioning somehow, perhaps as part of a list: "performance artist, painter, and whatever". We should be guided by what reliable sources call her. On the other hand, I removed the description "curator" because although she has curated group shows, she is not a professional curator. Along the same lines, we typically don't call an academic who has edited a volume of writings by multiple authors an "editor". --Macrakis (talk) 22:14, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Most reliable sources such as BBC, [] Tate [] and 198 Contemporary arts refer to her as an 'artist'. Plus I just checked UAL website where she's also referred to as an artist [] I presume this is because she creates paintings, costumes and videos which form an integral part of her performances, so she does work across a very broad area. This is also discussed quite extensively in academic book chapters about her work. I do feel it's more accurate to refer to her as an artist, given that reliable sources refer to her in this way. Failing that, perhaps she could be listed as 'performance artist', 'Painter' and 'Costumier'? 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:54AE:D783:8FD1:2544 (talk) 22:49, 16 February 2021 (UTC).


 * As I said, I think it's clearer to the reader if we mention the different kinds of art she produces in the lead. But that's just my opinion. --Macrakis (talk) 00:03, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * looking at website Allen self-identifies as a fine artist, so artist probably suffices? Acousmana (talk) 09:32, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I just added painter and costumier as suggested to offer clarification but I agree artist also works since she is referred to an artist in reliable sources and if she also self identifies as an artist perhaps we should go with that and clarify disciplines in the style and persona section below 2A00:23C5:E705:8200:1D31:710E:CBA:2147 (talk) 12:54, 17 February 2021 (UTC).


 * Allen's description is "interdisciplinary practice of live and recorded performances, costumes, lectures, paintings and video installations", unless there is a WP:SECONDARY to support "costumier" should maybe be avoided, and "painter," does it really need stating? "interdisciplinary artist" covers all bases meaning specificity in lead not required, can elaborate in main body. Acousmana (talk) 13:33, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Okay I see your logic and 'interdisciplinary' is mentioned in the style section as well, so it works. I have just removed some dead links and added some citations to the 'Persona and Style' section. Macrakis suggested that the sentence in the 'Television' section about her biracial heritage should be included in this section too. Do you agree?2A00:23C5:E705:8200:1D31:710E:CBA:2147 (talk) 13:45, 17 February 2021 (UTC).
 * if it's properly sourced, all good, we just need to uses WP:RS for whatever is stated about the artist, then there won't be any issues. Acousmana (talk) 14:01, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes I believe it is properly sourced but if you notice any errors let me know. For Persona and Style section I have included quotes from academic texts published through Wiley-Blackwell and Bloomsbury, linking to online excerpts available to read on Google books, and updated the career section taking on board what we discussed about this artists name. It might also be worth trying to source an article or interview which identifies the year she started to use the name Quilla Constance. Currently I don't know for sure when this began 86.133.124.162 (talk) 13:37, 18 February 2021 (UTC).

Exhibitions list
I've removed the list of exhibitions per MOS:ART but am preserving them here in case anyone would like to use it for future research.


 * 2019 'Teasing out Contingencies' Open Studio, Tate Exchange, Tate Modern
 * 2017 'Transcending the Signified', MOCA London
 * 2017 'Transcending the Signified', Old Fire Station Theatre
 * 2015 'Pukijam', 198 Contemporary Arts and Learning
 * 2015 '(Dis) identifications: Gender as Material' (symposium and screening), Institute of Contemporary Arts, London
 * 2015 'PUKIJAM' (solo exhibition) 198 Contemporary Arts and Learning
 * 2014 'Performance Art: Love, Lust and Longing' (lecture and group exhibition), The Freud Museum, London
 * 2008 'Jennifer Allen presents Sexual Visionaries.... Love, Hate, Narcissism, Mortality, Fetish and Taboo' (curated project) 176 London Zabludowicz Collection
 * 2007 'Dark Glasses' (group exhibition) The Standpoint Gallery, London
 * 2007 'The Dream of Putrefaction' (group exhibition) Fieldgate Gallery, London
 * 2006 'Goods To Declare MFA International' (group exhibition) Airport Terminal 1, Tel-Aviv, Israel
 * 2003 'SKINS Revisited' (solo exhibition and artists' residency) BizArt Center, Shanghai, Chinä: ARTLINKART International Residency Programme
 * 2001 'Bloomberg New Contemporaries' (group exhibition) Camden Arts Centre

Vegantics (talk) 21:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC) Vegantics (talk) 21:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)