Enough decoration can make it near impossible to decipher the architecture of some rifles. But there are basic rules for longrifles whether they are Christians Spring and 1775 or Bedford and 1840. When I was learning stuff from Chuck Dixon way back in the late 70's, I'd take him a rifle and he'd examine it as much by touch as by sight. He'd run his hands along it, turn it in his hand while holding the wrist, in front of the lock, along the forestock, from the tang to the comb, etc. Doesn't matter what school it is, or how decorated it is, if the architecture is off, that's a problem. Of course Chuck has a great way of making a fella feel great about the things done right, while gently pointing out what could have been done a little different, and might have had a pleasing effect.
Unless one is truly a master, most builds have some things to celebrate and some things that could have been done better. Pointing out the flaws doesn't ruin everything, and celebrating the great parts of a build doesn't cover a multitude of flaws. There's also a reason why they submit rifles anonymously at many gun judging venues such as Dixon's. The guns should be judged alone, not by reputation etc.
