: Sure I don't know how much rewriting you've done, but as I reread the article today (and please forgive me if it hasn't changed much, I often look at a couple hundred articles in a day), the places that concern me are not particularly large or glaring.  A simple example might be the first paragraph of the Years at MOCA paragraph, and even there it's small things "vastly" came off more to me as a sales adjective, whereas the continuation into the next sentence giving objective numbers was powerful and neutral. A large number of cognitive adjectives around there (fledgling, hallmark, vastly, leading, championing, ambitious, speculative) also contribute to that impression (even if they're accurate).  I'm not saying they all need to go, but I would prune, and work to focus the subjective ways we characterize the subject on places where we can't speak of those attributes more objectively, and/or places we can attribute those subjective opinions to the voice of real experts rather than Wikipedia.  Finally, the list of 30 artists at the end of the paragraph feels excessive in detail as well, which is a minor issue by itself, but takes on the feeling of a promotional blurb through its repetition of famous names that honestly doesn't feel like it tells much about Schimmel. I hope this helps!  Thanks!