Talk:Yana Peel

Tags and conflict of interest

Thanks for your help on this, particularly with overlinking - some useful changes that had missed my proofing! Have changed a tense back to present as it deals with current endeavours - I'd forgotten to add reason for the removal of the tags - I believe my edit dealt with the issues presented by them, hence removal. Happy to talk more about the article to improve it. Beckettnoti (talk) 16:45, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

How exactly does your edit address the conflict of interest tag? Edwardx (talk) 18:04, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I added the tag originally because of the efforts of Newcombe45 who only wrote on a small series of very connected articles. The activity of Beckettnoti only further compounds this issue I'm afraid. Rayman60 (talk) 20:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Rayman60 everyone starts somewhere and it's natural to start with things that you know. In this case my connected articles have been offering translation stubs of material previously not covered on English Wikipedia, e.g. Museo Experimental el Eco and Frida Escobedo. I would like to learn and improve. Edwardx Can you please explain why this is the case so that we can improve it? I had tried to improve the sourcing of information for this Wiki as the original sources were quite limited. I am not really sure now and I am left confused, certain edits have been made regarding neutral language - e.g. YP being the first person to bear the title of CEO being rendered as YP being successor to JPJ - the two are separate pieces of information, surely better to include both? JPJ was Director of the galleries, not CEO. Beckettnoti (talk) 09:31, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Some proposed changes

"She is the first person to bear this title." is a distinct piece of information to "She succeeded Julia Peyton-Jones who had been in charge for 25 years." - Julia Peyton-Jones bore the title of Director, the move towards having a CEO rather than a Director under the Yana Peel tenure is an important cultural shift. Perhaps both pieces of information should be included, but they are distinct pieces of information.Beckettnoti (talk) 10:02, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

• Organisations often introduce new job titles, even when the underlying role remains essentially the same. Your edits have been somewhat promotional, and adding "She is the first person to bear this title" to the lead may encourage readers to infer that she is somehow higher status than anyone who has worked there before. How is it "an important cultural shift", and is there a source for this? I note that you have not yet addressed the conflict of interest message on your talkpage. Edwardx (talk) 12:10, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

• That certainly wasn't the desired outcome or purpose of the edit. The role of CEO is a different function to that of Director; as the Repubblica article argues, the CEO designation marks a move in a more business-oriented direction than previous incumbents and it is notable that, unlike other figures heading up galleries, YP does not have a background in art history or curation. This is the cultural shift I am pointing towards. How would you like me to address the message on the talkpage? Beckettnoti (talk) 12:59, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

• Do you have an English language source? In any event, it does not need to be in the lead. As for any conflict of interest, you need to read the guidelines and provide a clear answer as to whether or not you have anything that could be construed as a conflict of interest, as your editing pattern suggests that this may be the case. Edwardx (talk) 13:08, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

• Thank you for your helpful response and guidance, and please forgive any faux-pas as they are not intentional. I am afraid that I do not have an English-language source, but I am fluent in Italian as detailed on my user page and would be happy to provide a translation of the relevant material if that is useful. The original source material I am referring to is this passage: "il binomio Peel-Obrist, tra finanza e curatela spericolata, potrebbe inaugurare un nuovo format di management in un mondo in cui il sostegno pubblico alle arti è sempre più fragile. Non è quindi per caso che sul biglietto da visita di Yana Peel ci sia scritto “Ceo” e non, come sempre succede quando si parla di musei e gallerie, “Direttore”.". This translates as "the Peel-Obrist partnership between finance and reckless curator could start a new management format in a world where public support for the arts is increasingly fragile. It is not by chance that Yana "CEO" is written on Peel's business card and not, as is usually the case at museums and galleries, "Director"." I have added a COI declaration to my user page and will put any further ideas through the talk page here - sorry for the inconvenience - are there any further steps that I need to take? Thank you again for your help and patience. Beckettnoti (talk) 14:54, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

References

Some suggestions for improvement

Yana is a friend of mine and sent me some links to some updates that should probably be added. I won't do it myself due to the friendship conflict of interest.

• In 2018, Peel was made a Henry Crown Fellow within the Aspen Global Leadership Network at the Aspen Institute [1].

• The same year, she was appointed to oversee an open call to re-imagine Grosvenor Square. [2] and was awarded a RIBA Honorary Fellowship [3].

• Evening Standard Progress 1000 2018

A few further links which are likely useful:

• The Serpentine Trust, Annual Report, 2017/18
• Serpentine Galleries CEO Yana Peel talks London's culture and why it is a city for everyone

There are other requests, and I could in theory make an email introduction to an experienced Wikipedian in good standing if you're interested in discussing those with her. I would say that the main request would be the COI tag at the top of the article (and the other ones) which could hopefully be removed after suitable work on the entry has been completed.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 12:57, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

I think the editing community should forever be aware of conflicts of interest. In my experience, the people most eager to remove templated messages of any kind are the ones of which we most need to be wary. Chris Troutman (talk) 13:19, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

It is simultaneously sad and ironic that you can invent something, pour your life into it but not be able to use it. Like Alexander Graham Bell not be able to make telephone calls. Anyway...ThatMontrealIP (talk) 06:22, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Co-Owner of [NSO Group]

According to this article in The Guardian. Yana Peel is a co-owner of the government spyware company NSO Group. This is more than noteworthy, but I feel a consensus is needed on how to add this to a living person's biographical page. --24.160.188.8 (talk) 15:52, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Totally agree. She is a co-owner of the fund that owns Pegasus (spyware) through NSO Group. Her claim that she is not "personally involved in the operation or decisions of the fund" is hollow as hell. Just to recap: the Pegasus (spyware) / NSO Group is implicated in spying on lots of human rights activist, including in the Gulf area. That Yana Peel was given the "Freedom of Expression Awards" in 2018 seems absolutely bizarre, under the circumstances. Huldra (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

This story was corrected by the Guardian on 29 January 2020 and they issued a correction here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Occasionalpedestrian (talk • contribs) 13:42, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

COI request 1

Yana Peel no longer holds an advisory position on the V-A-C Foundation so this should be removed. She is not named on the V-A-C Website - http://www.v-a-c.ru/ Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 08:14, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

COI request 2

Please remove the reference to her association with NSO group as this was redacted by the Guardian in 2020. To retain the relevant context please change this to:

Peel stepped down as CEO in June 2019 as a consequence of the attention paid to her alleged co-ownership of NSO Group. However, a later redaction published by The Guardian confirmed that Peel was not involved in the management, operations or control of NSO.Ref Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 09:45, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Image change

• What I think should be changed:

Let's change the article image to this one: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Walpole_Future_of_British_Luxury_Summit_2021_0531.jpg

• Why it should be changed:

This one is more recent and a nicer photo.

Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 09:01, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

References

 Not done: I don't think that's necessary at this time. Quetstar (talk) 12:04, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

New award to be added to Awards section

• What I think should be changed:

Yana has been named in The Walpole Power List Top 50 most influential people in British Luxury. We should add the following bullet point to the Awards and Honours list:

- The Walpole: Top 50 Most Influential People in British Luxury.

• Why it should be changed:

This is a respected and notable award so it should be added to the Awards and Honours section of the article.

• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

The Walpole Power List 2022

https://www.thewalpole.co.uk/news/the-walpole-power-list-2020-the-50-most-influential-people-in-british-luxury

Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 13:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

References

 Not done: Please note that the reference to the award is the website of the company that awarded the award (primary source). In order to add this award, it would need a good secondary source establishing its notability. Sciencefish (talk) 18:18, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Sciencefish. Would this article work as a secondary source establishing its notability? https://fashionunited.uk/news/people/walpole-names-top-50-most-influential-people-in-british-luxury/2022011360578 Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 11:52, 24 February 2022 (UTC)