Talk:Designer

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Stagecraft, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.StagecraftWikipedia:WikiProject StagecraftTemplate:WikiProject StagecraftStagecraft articles

Occupations (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations articles

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

Industrial design

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Industrial design, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Industrial design on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Industrial designWikipedia:WikiProject Industrial designTemplate:WikiProject Industrial designIndustrial design articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Getting a balance[edit]

, trying to give a balanced and objective definition and explanation of what a designer is and does. There is quite a long list of 'examples', and I guess it could be expanded further - but would that really be helpful? I think it is not helpful to have a few examples presented in detail (Costume and Game, as we have now). We cannot have all the examples presented in that way. That should be left to the main articles about the professions. The 'See also' and 'Categories' are also not helpful as they are. Bristolian46 (talk) 17:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to delete the paragraphs on Costume Designer and Game Designer, which are linked through the Examples list to their respective main articles. It doesn't make sense to have just these two given in detail. Bristolian46 (talk) 17:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral: It's probably a good idea to delete them or at least shorten them and include equally short examples of all the other designers listed. The only reason I can think of to keep them is because the article lacks content without them. It's pretty much a stub without the examples. Maybe a whole new structure is needed with common subtopics like history, modern uses, controversy , etc. Oicumayberight (talk) 18:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A graphic designer is what I would want to be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.50.169.198 (talk) 17:03, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

^[1]

Multiple issues[edit]

This article as it stands hardly justifies being in Wikipedia at all. It is primarily a simple, uninformative essay, with basic errors in spelling and grammar, just one inappropriate citation, and a long list. Nigel Cross (talk) 09:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

^ Cite error: The named reference undefined was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[undefined-1] Cite error: The named reference undefined was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[1]