This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metropolitan Museum of Art. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Metropolitan Museum of ArtWikipedia:GLAM/Metropolitan Museum of ArtTemplate:WikiProject Metropolitan Museum of ArtMetropolitan Museum of Art articles
I have removed the gallery artist's own book; it's not independent, and the same statements are found in the independent sources from reporters who spoke to him, so there's no value lost. I've also addressed some coatracking: There is no need to cite multiple NY news sources for the fact that the museum will be open all night, or that the exhibition broke an attendance record, especially when that is the title of one of the articles. There's also some coatrack synthesis: the Fontana dictionary reference to Said's book would be fine, if the book was mentioned in any of the articles - it is not. Orientalism the term is not the same as Orientalism the book, and it is clear that the concept is the basis, not the specifics in the book. Additionally, four sources were cited claiming reference to Said by name, only one actually did. The rest only referenced Orientalism. To at least get some semblance of differences, I selected different quotes from different sources to indicate different nuances, especially what the sense of "inverting Orientalism" was all about from the artist's point-of-view. MSJapan (talk) 03:17, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Problem with MSJapan's comment is that the term Orientalism, as used by this curator and as currently used among Anglophone academics was created by Edward Said. The Wikipedia article accurately points out that the term is older ans was neutral wne coined and for a century thereafter. However, since Said published, "orientalism" it is NEVER used in an academic or intellectually sophisticated context in an sense other than the one he gave it. The term has the meaning - in the articles I cited, and everywhere else in the scholarly conversation - defined in the second paragraph of the Wikipedia article. Any educated person reading the articles MSJapan will see that they use the Saidian concept. MSJapan here misleads by pretending to accuracy.E.M.Gregory (talk) 05:07, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The allegation of WP:COATRACKING is particularly misleading. An exhibition is a statement or argument made by a curator acting as auteur. The part of the article MSJapan attacks is, like the article it cites, about the exhibition as an argument presented by its auteur, Bolton. Citing Bolton's book directly - not merely news article about the exhibition he created - is essential to presenting his creation. News article show that his vision is newsworthy (most exhibitions aren't), and certainly secondary sources are essential, but it is not merely essential, but even preferable, to include a statement of intent direct form the horse's mouth.E.M.Gregory (talk) 05:17, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to User:Johnbod for correcting MSJapan's misleading misunderstanding on the page.E.M.Gregory (talk) 05:21, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
