Talk:List of glass artists

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you want a chaotic situation, well you got it now. The separate list was made, because to many unlinked names were added in the main article. If you want a short all-american list, do so and delete this list and return those names to the main article. If we want a world wide list of glass artists, with or without linking in en-wikipedia (which may come in time) let the list grow (yes, without the weblinks!!). But no discrimination please. And more talk on this page please, before a too drastic action is taken.--GerardusS (talk) 14:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

• GerardusS; thanks for the comment. First off, I should just say that the red or unlinked names were removed in order to be consistent, not to give the page a US bias. I'm sorry and I apologise if that was the effect of my edit. OK, that said, for my own part, I actually agree with you: if an artist is working in a field they should be listed in a list like this regardless of whether or not they currently warrant their own article on Wikipedia. (I dont see any problem whatsoever with this; the en-Wiki link may follow or it may not). However, others do not see it this way. What do we do in order to be consistent? Red links are OK or are they not? Marcus22 (talk) 19:23, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Marcus, In think that Red Links are for the time being o.k. I predict that removing them leads to making more (very) small and still very promotional articles on the same artists as whe can see daily in the other visual arts (as sculpture). And that is what we try to prevent in the first place, isn't it?. I wait for other contributions to this discussion.--GerardusS (talk) 07:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

You moved Australian name: ok. You allowed red link with Czechs: not very consistant.--GerardusS (talk) 07:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)