Talk:Fulcrum Gallery

Latest comment: 15 years ago by VirtualSteve in topic Chronological list of one-person exhibitions

The main confusion about this defunct gallery is its name. "Fvlcrvm Gallery" ought to be directed to it, since most of the artworld knows it by that name. The owner's name, "Shakespeare" was added later, so it is the most recent name the gallery was known by, before it closed. Maybe "Shakespeare's Fvlcrvm" should be redirected to it as well, for clarity's sake.JustineDane (talk) 22:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I'll do that.--S Marshall Talk/Cont 02:03, 10 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Tacky images edit

Wow this article is one of the tackiest I have ever read when the images are considered. I mean how many pictures of the old blond lady with her plastic boobs on display (including her jumping into frame with some guy who is purported to be Robert De Niro & in fact I wouldn't be surprised if they are photo-shopped) do we need? Hardly any of them assist the article as images are supposed to, and these just make the article hard to read. All in all it seems that the blond is using wikipedia in an effort to get noticed! I will be interested in other comments for a while before I start removing some of these--VS talk 16:47, 2 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

I agree. We also don't need a list of every single article written about the place, which looks like showcasing rather than verifying article content. Presumably you've seen the WP conflict of interest noticeboard discussion? 86.141.83.209 (talk) 05:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)Reply
No I hadn't until you just pointed it out. That explains much of the content. I have removed some images but others should also be removed and much of the content should be rewritten further to remove the peacock terms.--VS talk 22:16, 4 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Press Coverage edit

I have moved this material to here - not required on the article page.--VS talk 22:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Chronological list of one-person exhibitions edit

I think this section should be severely cropped to the notable ones only .... those with their own article? TeapotgeorgeTalk 22:27, 4 December 2008 (UTC)Reply