Talk:Dianne Blell

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

Thank you for reviewing this article—

I have an academic background in Dianne Blell’s work through my dissertation research, which focuses on the preservation of underrepresented artists’ archives and legacies in New York. I am familiar with her practice through field research, oral history interviews, and archival study.

I agree with the concerns raised in the article tags and will suggest edits here on the Talk page going forward.

Example of proposed edits: 1. Lead sentence Original: “Dianne Blell is an American photographer and multimedia artist recognized for…” Suggested: “Dianne Blell is an American photographer and multimedia artist known for…” 2. Technique description Original: “Blell spent years meticulously constructing…” Suggested: “Blell constructed…” 3. Pioneer claim Original: “She is regarded as a pioneer…” Suggested: “Blell has contributed…” 4. Exhibition listing Original: “Her work has been exhibited at major institutions…” Suggested: “Her work has been exhibited at institutions including…”

I recognize other instances of problematic content and I am happy to remove it or provide additional sources.

Thank you Rachelmward (talk) 13:09, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

COI Disclosure and Request for Tag Review

Hello, my username is Rachelmward, and I’ve contributed to this article based on my academic research on Dianne Blell. I previously disclosed a potential conflict of interest above, as I have written about Blell in published conference papers and other venues.

Following the {{COI}}, {{Close connection}}, and {{Promotional}} tags, I’ve now revised the article for neutrality, clarity, and compliance with Wikipedia tone and sourcing standards. I have: - Trimmed and reorganized the lead for concision - Removed comprehensive archival references - Confirmed independent secondary sources - Ensured proper attribution of analysis and commentary - Improved neutrality and disclosed my connection clearly

I believe the issues flagged by the tags have been resolved, and I respectfully invite uninvolved editors to review the article and consider whether the tags may now be removed.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to contribute. Rachelmward (talk) 02:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Rachelmward, as previously communicated, you must stop directly editing the article, and instead use the Edit Request System. This has been mentioned several times on your user talk page, and information about edit requests have been shared there. Please re-read the messages there regarding WP's guidelines and policies on COI editing. Netherzone (talk) 02:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Netherzone: A lot of this is going to have to go. For example on the para starting "After the turn of the millennium, Blell returned to school" is referenced to small profile that is smaller than the para on here, which makes it all conjecture. I suspect a lot of it is like. I think it needs stubified. I think it might be heading to Afd as a WP:TNT case. scope_creep^Talk 16:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

I had the exact same thought. This article should either be stubified or TNT'd given the condition. This is beyond a simple rewrite. MediaKyle (talk) 17:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@MediaKyle, you are welcome to stubbify or TNT. I've spent a lot of time trying to clean up the promo, NPOV, puffery and original research, and haven't even begun to check content against the sourcing (much of which is primary). Netherzone (talk) 17:08, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Scope creep, I've been working on cleaning it up, but as you mention, it has a long way to go to clean up the promo and puffery. It's a shame, because Blell is a notable artist. I'm not certain if the "Works" section is original research or taken from a primary source. It may indeed have to be stubified or TNT'd. Netherzone (talk) 17:07, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Netherzone: I think the two of yous have made it better already. That is a major improvement. 20:40, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Solid work!! Completely turned the article around, in double-quick time. scope_creep^Talk 20:44, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Scope creep, thanks to you as well for your contributions. Netherzone (talk) 20:44, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

And to @David notMD, @Theroadislong and @MediaKyle. TNT no longer seems necessary. Netherzone (talk) 20:47, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Agreed, definitely looks a lot better now. Great work! MediaKyle (talk) 20:48, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Scope creep, @Netherzone and @MediaKyle Reducing byte length by ~70% by editors other than the creating editor probably justifies removal of all tags, but I will leave that decision to those who did much more trimming than I did. David notMD (talk) 11:43, 27 April 2025 (UTC)