  , it wasn't the total length of the article that worried me, but the relative size of the different sections. Origin contains 11 lines, which covers 400 or more years of the history of lace. Contemporary is 16 lines, covering just the present day, with minute details such as several lines of the locations of one, very specific, type of contemporary lace. I wouldn't want to get rid of this altogether, but I don't think it belongs here. There SHOULD be a section on contemporary lace, but it should be shorter.  I must admit that I don't like very long Wikipedia articles. I find them hard to read when I don't know much about the subject. I prefer an overview article at top, then links to different sections, so I can explore the area that interests me. A block of text just makes me feel I have to read the lot. If you put in details on modern lace fences in the main article, then why not put in details of every single lace style, historic or modern? Because that really WOULD make the article too long! Details, such as locations and dates, belong in an article about that specific type of lace. As we have done for all other types of lace. The articles are short, but we have tried to make sure that they aren't stubs. I am sure that is a better approach. But that's just my opinion!   