Talk:Interior design/Archives/2013

Room Theme

A discussion on the differences of a theme vs. a concept would be beneficial but as it is this segment adds nothing to the definition of interior designMike Dudek (talk) 17:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Picture

Can we please change this awful picture? It does nothing to illustrate the definition of interior design. cmodonne 9:22, 1 September 2009

Definition too narrow

If you acknowledge interior design is a legitmate profession then the definition of, education of, practice of and the professional advancement of the profession has been clearly defined and academically and professionally vetted by the organizations that represent professional interior designers in North America- NCIDQ,IDEC,CIDA,IIDA,ASID & IDC. If you do not acknowledge the umbrella of legitimate interior design organizations and you are not in support of their efforts then you are not a professional interior designer. Stop trying to redefine the profession to fit your own narrow, self serving and unprofessional purposes. Now in regard to the legislation of interior design I maintain that the profession has done a poor job of defending itself against the Institute for Justices campaign to obfuscate the realities of the profession. The effort to legislate the practice of interior design is not the best way to advance the profession. User:Mike Dudek|Mike Dudek]] (talk) 20:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I notice the additions I added to the interior design article concerning the basic principles of interior design have been deleted. Anyone care to explain why? I was just trying to help in good faith. Now this article once again does not explain anything about the theory of interior design practice. This article is just waffling on about the industry in the USA. Poor, very poor. When people search an international encyclopedia for information on interior design I would suggest they are more interested in the art of interior design and not the politics of interior design or the industrial relations aspects of interior design in one particular country. No doubt this article was written by an American. Most of the world is outside your borders mate therefor most interior design is practiced outside your borders. At least they can still visit my site to learn something on what interior design actually is and how it is done. I guess I should be grateful Wikipedia doesn't want to swim in my pond. G.L, Hovel to Home, 31 October 2008.

Not an education problem:

Following the example of the Architecture article, I have created a separate article for Interior Design Education and moved all of the specific program information there. This will keep the interior design page from becoming a marketing vehicle for multiple programs. K8tey 21:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)k8tey

I too think this definition of decor is very narrow. Decor is so much more than decoration or interior design. It is a set of attitudes and histories.

I have changed the reference to University of Washington to Washington State University, as UW does not even have a Baccaulareate program. Most of the information for Master's degrees in the United States is incorrect and needs to be fleshed out, but I do not want to continually revert it until the end of the quarter when I have the opportunity to write something more appropriate and correctly cited. The way the information about Interior Architecture in the United States is presented is inadequate to explain the depth of issues surrounding the semantics of the profession and its legal status in the US. This section also reads as if there are 5 or so INDS programs in the US, which is a gross understatement. I think it would be much more informative to discuss different degrees (AA, BS, BFA, MS, MFA, MA, MID, PHd, DD) instead of specific programs.

Marketing information for specific academic programs seems NPOV and impacts the article negatively (imagine if every school added marketing information for their program to the article!) It appears that the article has been reverted multiple times by someone from the Stuttgart program. I am not going to revert it back again, as I do not want to break the WP:3RR or get involved in back-and-forth editing.

BartaS, I see you have invited me to discuss this with you over email, but I do not have your email, and this is better discussed here. I think you could be a fantastic source of information on European ID education for this article if a NPOV is taken, and specific programs are not marketed. K8tey 22:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

K8tey, I fully agree with you on the above and I'm glad you're interested in European ID education - I'd be pleased to write more. I considered my contribution here an introduction (perhaps to students researching ID), and would have welcomed editing by others to expand on the article; I was planning on adding more information as I had the time. I was a bit surprised at the blunt deletion of the information: a bit mundane, no? As to specific programmes, the HfT Stuttgart along with 4 other European unviersities and the European Union have created a unique Master's programme for designers bound the normal bounds of ID - and I think this deserves special mention, as it redefines the work of an ID to meet today's economic demands. I admit, it tends to stick out a bit, but I think this is more due to the fact that there is not enough information about other education possibilities than to the "marketing". --BartaS 06:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Copyright problem

As pointed out on WP:CP, this article seems to have contained a significant amount of text copied from http://ncidq.org/definition.htm since August 2004, and is thus an apparent copyright violation. I have reverted the page to the last "good" version for the time being; it doesn't leave much. I think the material merged in from Elements of interior design may be OK, as it cited two sources, but I'm not sure. --rbrwr^± 20:56, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Just removed text pasted from http://www.ncidq.org/AboutUs/AboutInteriorDesign/DefinitionofInteriorDesign.aspx __ Just plain Bill (talk) 18:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Definition problem:

The problem with this definition of Interior Design is that the focus is on 'decorating' rather than defining the term around 'design'. One can see from the FIDER & NCIDQ information that Designers do more than 'decorate'! This definition should be revised to reflect what Designer's actually do (verb & noun)and the above definition should be placed under the heading Interior Decoration. We must clarify the definition between the two rather than continue this misinterpretation!

--Definition problem has been solved but needs to be expanded on. I keep meaning to get to it. :)--User:k8teyok

--I think that Interior Decorating should be a separate article. There is too much confusion and not enough Interior Design information in this article, it quickly veers to decorating. Interior Decorating can be a career, but it is very distinct from Interior Design. I am an interior design student and it is an engineering degree, similar to Architecture. Decorators do not need to be licensed anywhere, and are not designers. Also, Interior decorating should be categorized under decorative arts while Interior Design should be categorized under Engineering, Design, and Architecture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.83.80.161 (talk) 15:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

External links in body of article

The external links in the new section, The profession, need to be moved to an external links section at the end of the article. WP articles are not supposed to have external links from the body of the article like they are in this section. -999 (Talk) 19:46, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Style section

This section seems misplaced or rather misnamed. I had envisioned this section to contain information about the various decorating styles for interior design, such as Asian, Baroque, Mission, and so. I general information that I mentioned would better fit under the interior decorating topic, with a new topic (Interior Decorating Styles or Design Styles) created to show examples of various decorating styles. (--lwalt 14:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC))

Interior Design vs. Interior Decoration

A lot of the content here seems to be propaganda written by ASID/IIDA/NCIDQ and the colleges that offer degrees in Interior Design.

(I didn't write the sentence above)The claims under "Difference between interior design and interior decorating" are controversial at best. Only around twenty American states/territories have a Title Act restricting the use of the title "Interior Designer". Even fewer have a Practice Act extension that restricts the practice of activities related to interior design in addition to restricting title use. The claims cite sources from the pro-certification side. Pending and existing legislation (whether Title or Practice Acts) are being fought by various organizations, and the matter is not nearly so clear-cut. I plan on renaming this section to "Controversy" or something to that extent, and adding the opposing viewpoints. I will leave the original content more or less intact. Michael peng 22:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I redid the "Difference between interior design and interior decorating" as a description of interior design legislation in the United States. The alleged distinction between "interior designer" and "interior decorator" is much a matter of state legislation and individual opinion, and hardly accepted industry-wide as a legitimate division. Legislation proponents should feel free to add their viewpoints. I will be expanding this section over time.Michael peng 23:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I live in Australia and from my renovating and interior design experience the folks who organize structural changes to a building inside or out are Architects, Draftsman or Builders. The terms Interior Designer and Interior Decorator are interchangeable. From the public perspective it does not matter whether you go to the yellow pages and employ a Designer or a Decorator you get the same person who will design and decorate the interior space based on function, mood and harmony principles. Any structural considerations are explored in partnership with Architects, Draftsman or Builders. I think these two articles should be merged because I have never met a Designer who wasn't a Decorator and vice versa. The difference is just semantics and politics. It is true that different colleges have slightly different course content but they all cover the same basic knowledge i.e. decorating rooms, CAD and how to work with Architects. All the courses I am aware of in Australia use Interior Design and Decorating in their titles interchangeably. The usual qualification appears to be a 2 yr diploma. Architecture is a separate qualification as is Drafting, and Building is a post graduate qualification for building construction tradespeople. No structural changes can be made without council approved plans created by licensed Architects, Draftsman or Builders. G.L Hovel to Home 30 October 2008

Update to the previous paragraph. I have just been talking to a Builder mate of mine who contends that all Interior Decorators in Australia should be calling themselves Interior Designers. His rationale is this, all painters undertake a 4 year apprenticeship and graduate as Painters and Decorators. They study not only the theory and practice of painting structures but also the chemistry of paint and color schemes among other things. There is very little overlap in what Painters and Decorators learn and what Interior Designers study (except for color schemes). Interior Designers learn about designing the space inside a room or building. Interior Design is one profession and Painting and Decorating is another. Ironically Painters and Decorators do very little decorating. If they can't paint it or wallpaper it they aint decorating it. Confused?

He confirms that Interior Designers cannot alter or submit structural plans to council in Australia, that is part of what Builders and Architects do. In commercial structures like malls, warehouses and office towers there is a greater scope for what Interior Designers can do because the structural integrity of the building is in the outer walls and internal pylons. These buildings are designed to be gutted and remodeled many times in their life. These remodeling projects are often designed by Interior Designers with input from many other trades. Shopfitters who are a specialty within the Cabinetmaking trade also often design these projects. Large projects are usually managed by licensed builders or architects however as it is their job to manage all the trades involved and make sure everything is done to council code. There are no licensing requirements for Interior Designers in Australia because they are not directly involved in structural design. They work within the boundaries of existing structural plans but don't create or alter them. If they need structural plans changed they outsource that work to Architects, Draftsmen or Builders. I stand by my assertion that the Interior Design and Interior Decorating articles be combined somehow. It should also be expanded to incorporate information on the theory of interior design. G.L Hovel to Home 30 October 2008.

Bias in article

Parts of the article are becoming degraded in what appears to be a "war of words" on licensing requirements for interior design practice in the United States. I also have problems with what appears to be websites used for supporting a particular side of the issue. I've reviewed some of the links, and they appear borderline (read: questionable objectivity and reliability) given that the site is hosted by an advocacy group with an interest in one side in the issue. In response, a veiled attack was launched right in the prose of the article to imply what would be a fallacy about qualifications to support a view for a particular side. Information of this type ultimately places undue weight on the article. Are there not other third-party disinterested or neutral sources to lend better credence to what's said here?

Please remember that Wikipedia is not a soapbox or battleground to debate the merits of a contentious or controversial issue.

Therefore, I propose a rewrite of part of the article in a neutral, non-point of view manner without advocating or lobbying for outside organizations. I consider the practice of using the prose of the article to advocate or lobby on behalf of someone or organization for your side a conflict of interest at best. →Lwalt ^♦ talk 19:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Took a look at the article before I was to start editing, and I'd like to extend a thousand thanks to the editor who took the bold approach to "neutralize" the POV in this article. →Lwalt ^♦ talk 05:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

There is a tremendous amount of bias and misinformation going on here. Very few states have interior design legislation. Most of these so called laws are nothting more than hybrid titles such as "certified", "registered" or "licensed". These titles are manipulated by the holders of them to create the impression that you need to have one of these titles BY LAW to PRACTICE interior design. Not the case. They are nothing more than state sanctioned favors bestowed upon a group of designers who have lobbyed their legislators to create these special titles.

Do your own research Lwalt. Don't rely on members of the interior design "CARTEL", ASID/IIDA/NCIDQ to feed you their propaganda.

Excuse me...But you've got the wrong person here. I'm well aware of some of the issues, even though I'm not in the industry and not an interior designer; I'm only a person who is interested in interior as an art. What I've seen here is advocacy in pushing for a view from a particular standpoint, and I expected more from the article than advocacy, lobbying or whatever from somebody's side. So, I have no idea of what you're referring to as to relying on members of a cartel. Rather, I had hoped that the article covered more of the history of interior design, interior design practice around the world, the various disciplines of interior design and so on. As for information about interior licensing in the U.S., the article would not hold a world view (this is the reason why I placed a global/US tag on the section) since we're only talking about one country in the world, and I know that interior design practices exist all over the world. I had to express my view that the article had descended into what appeared to be an advocacy from a specific side, and that alone would have placed undue weight on the article.

So, what are you referring to as to "cartel" and favoring a group of designers here? May be I'm missing something since, as I've mentioned, I'm only interested in interior design as an art, in which case legislation affecting the interior design practice does not have any bearing for me. →Lwalt ^♦ talk 22:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Lwalt: The practice and DEFINITION of Interior Design has become highly politicized by the interior design "cartel" that consists of ASID, IIDA, NCIDQ and the colleges that offer degree programs in interior design. NCIDQ, which claims to be a testing organization actually writes model legislation that mandates the use of their test for activists to use who are trying to restrict the practice of interior design at the state level under the pretense that un-educated/un-licensed interior designers (their definition of education) pose a threat to public safety and welfare.

The concept that there is a difference between interior design and interior decoration is a poitical statement. The definitions of Interior Design in Wikipedia under "Interior Design as a Profession" are also political and were drafted by the Caretl as part of their campaign and obsession to pass laws restricting the practice of interior design.

Interior Design is an ART and does not require government regulation. I agree that Wikipedia should reflect a world view. Interior Design legislation seems to be a creation of the US & Canada as I have yet to find another country in the world that regulates the practice of interior design (including and especially Europe).

I suggest you read "Designing Cartels" by The Institute For Justice http://www.ij.org/publications/other/designing-cartels.html as well as the recent George Will editorial in the Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/21/AR2007032101789.html (JFRIDAY7) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jfriday7 (talk • contribs) 16:51:59, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

Perhaps I should make something clear involving this interior design article in particular and Wikipedia articles in general. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or forum to engage in political debates, edit wars or flame wars about the merits or feasibility of legal issues or impending legislation that affects a position of advocacy for one side or the other. Anyway, legislation is volatile, which could become stale based on changing conditions in the political climate. If anything, this same type of information (that is, legal practice of interior design, if applicable) from other jurisdictions around the world would put the legislation or even the legal practice of interior design in a global context that can be compared and contrasted all the same. That would be my suggestion to add knowledge and help improve the article, rather than provide a U.S.-only slant that places undue weight on the article about the issues that you've raised here. If you can contribute something along those lines about legal practice of interior design in other countries (both English speaking and non-English speaking) that helps in the global understanding of interior design, that would be much more appreciated, especially by readers of this online encyclopedia.

If no information exists (as you say) to discuss the global regulation of interior design, perhaps this aspect of the article does not belong here in the first place (anyway, legislation in the United States properly belongs in a sub-article). Information about the legislative or legal issues involving interior design practice detracts from the discussion of interior design as an art, especially since introduction of this information also brings with it a decidedly unbalanced point of of view for advocates or lobbyists who are merely interested in using this article as a forum to debate the merits for why something should or should not be the case. →Lwalt ^♦ talk 08:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I only wrote the legislation section to replace the old "Interior Decoration vs. Interior Design", which was pretty bad in general. I've removed this section completely for now. I also added an earlier comment on the talk page to the opening paragraph. Michael peng 17:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Lwalt, if you take a look at Interior Decoration, I think merging this page with it would accomplish a lot of what you want. It would also smooth over the whole legislation definition controversy away from Wikipedia.Michael peng 18:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

OK...I've placed merge tags on this article and the one for Interior decoration to combine the content. That would go a ways towards placing overlapping information in one place. For "Regulation of interior design practice in the United States and Canada" (if this is unique to these two countries, since it was alleged that no other country does this), I still say that this discussion belongs in a sub-article that's linked from here (only a summary would appear in this article).

However, if this sub-article is created to cover the controversies surrounding licensing and regulation of interior design in the United States and Canada, the article must be written in a neutral or balanced tone to present the issues from a beneficial and contrary basis as they relate to public policy (that is, how this issue helps and hurts the consuming public and commercial practice that do or don't occur in other countries around the world (remember, the global view)). I'm recommending this approach so that someone won't come along and propose deletion of the article, or worst yet, mark the article for speedy deletion because that person perceives the article to be nothing more than than a advocating for a point of view. This discussion has already been broached here a while back (conversation somewhere on this talk page if the conversation hasn't been archived) when someone copied text into this article from one of the interior design association sites (a copyright violation, by the way) to purportedly "correct" the definition of interior design to distinguish this term from interior decoration. That discussion also belongs in the sub-article to discuss the issue of distinguishing the two terms to control or liberate the practice of interior design. →Lwalt ^♦ talk 10:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

It will be difficult to do this, since the subject is so heated between the Institute of Justice (which is who Mr. Peng probably works for). The debate is a big deal (among ID students, practitioners and in the industry) in the US right now, so even if only as a subsection, I think it's important to include design legislation/regulation. Mr. Peng is right. The definition of "interior design" is debatable. Some practioners will tell you that they don't decorate. At all. (One reason I think it's wrong to combine this article with "interior decoration".) They consider what they do to be "interior architecture," which is regulated in other parts of the world. In my opinion, this should be regulated. It's contracting, it's specifying, it's code-affecting. However, in the US, you can not say that you are an interior architect unless you have gone to school for architecture. Some other practioners, many of whom the Institute for Justice files suits on behalf of, only do decorating. And they do great jobs-decorating. They feel like the legislation will put them out of business if they can't say that they are "designers." I am a student. I am not a member of either side, and I think they both have their good points, so I think it's important to somehow include it. Like I said, it's a really big deal in the industry right now. But Lwalt, you're also very correct in that we have find a way to not let it be a soap box for both sides. Just in the discussion I think it's easy to see how strongly people feel. I just don't know. I know there are some media articles out there about it. Could we source them? (sorry, forgot to sign this) -Jenny Wms. 23 Aug 2007

I do not have an objection to coverage of the legislative and regulatory end of interior design, but I do think that this topic is better covered as a sub-article to this one. The problem with including a full discussion of the controversy involving U.S. licensing and regulation of interior design in the main article is that the general discussion of what interior design is (that is, the art of it) will become obscured by the discussion about the politics of the practice, causing this aspect to become the main focus of the article, particularly since the article is already thin on details. In other words, if I look up "interior design" in any electronic or printed encyclopedic reference, I get a discussion about the foundation of the discipline, its history, what it entails, among other things related primarily to the art of the subject. That's what I get every time, and I'm pretty sure that other readers would expect the same.

Although some interior designers don't do "interior decorating," decorating is recognized as a part of a subset of skills expected of interior designers, at least from what I've read from information provided by both electronic and printed sources. This point simply acknowledges what interior designers do in general within the scope of their jobs, among other things. And yes...there is some overlap with both interior design and interior decorating, in spite of the push for legislation to distinguish both terms from a marketing and legal standpoint. With that said, the decision to or not to merge information from the interior decorating article should not be based on what some designers do not perform as part of their job. The exclusion of this recognized skill set (speaking of "interior decorating") would represent a specific point of view of a faction of interior designers that goes against the principles of creating a neutral encyclopedic article.

So, to provide balanced coverage of the politics of interior design, I'd say that the discussion should be linked as a sub-article to the main article and encompass not only the rules, regulations and licensing issues in the U.S. and Canada, but also the same for other countries (or continents) around the world, even if the interior design practice is regulated under the guise of interior architecture. As an example, here's one reference to UK regulation of the title "architect," which also mentions "interior design as one of the activities performed by some practicing architects. But, in any event, coverage of this issue should be encyclopedic and preferably, of course, not primarily U.S. centric. Sources of information to support both sides of the legislative and regulatory discussion are acceptable, as long as the sources follow Wikipedia policies and guidelines for reliability, verifiability and neutral point of view without original research. →Lwalt ^♦ talk 23:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Do we know for a fact that Interior Architecture is regulated in other countries by law as a seperate profession from architecture, interior design or interior decoration? If so, how do the educational requirements overseas for Interior Architecture compare to the Interior Design programs in the US? It does seem that laws that attempt to regulate "interior design" are a US/Canada creation. If there are other countries in the world that have laws prohibiting people from calling themselves an interior designer or practicing interior design who don't have a degree in interior design, I'd be interested to hear about it. It does not seem to be the case in Europe. And what about a European trained Interior Designer or Interior Decorator who wants to work with clients in the US? Could a US trained Interior Designer from an "accredited" college move to Europe and practice Interior Architecture? I've heard it's not the easiest thing for Architects to move their practices from one country to another, but I'm not sure. Just looking for the world view on this subject. It would seem that Architecture, Interior Architecture, Interior Design, Interior Decoration, Landscape Design, Urban Planning and even Graphic Design are more and more related in the built environment. Some large architecure firms now offer all of these services. jFriday7 23 Aug 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jfriday7 (talk • contribs) 22:33, August 23, 2007 (UTC).

One other note from History: Stanford White the famous architect of McKim, Mead & White kept his practice going financially by importing and selling European antiques to his clients. From Wikipedia on Stanford White: He extended the limits of architectural services to include interior decoration, dealing in art and antiques, and even planning and designing parties. He collected paintings, pottery, and tapestries. If White could not procure the right antiques for his interiors, he would sketch neo-Georgian standing electroliers or a Renaissance library table. Outgoing and social, he possessed a large circle of friends and acquaintances, many of whom became clients. White had a major influence in the "Shingle Style" of the 1880s, on Neo-Colonial style, and the Newport cottages for which he is celebrated. JFriday7 23 August 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jfriday7 (talk • contribs) 22:52, August 23, 2007 (UTC).

And then we have architects who became famous for their furniture designs such as Eero Saarinen. From Wikipedia: Saarinen first received critical recognition while still working for his father, for a chair designed together with Charles Eames for the "Organic Design in Home Furnishings" competition in 1940, for which they received first prize. This chair, like all other Saarinen chairs was taken into production by the Knoll furniture company, founded by the Saarinen family friend Florence (Schust) Knoll together with her husband Hans Knoll. jFriday7 23 August 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jfriday7 (talk • contribs) 23:03, August 23, 2007 (UTC).

Reverting article to earlier version

I reverted the article to an earlier to not only remove vandalism to the article, but to also restore the content resulting a virtual blanking of content. The statement that was left in the article implied a point of view that was not supplemented by a verifiable, reliable reference. If this content is to be returned to the article, please provide references that conform and comply with the principles of verifiable and reliable sources. Thanks for your help. →Lwalt ^♦ talk 17:50, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

this is a good job —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.159.146.131 (talk) 16:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Interior design not a profession

It is ludicrous to say interior design is a profession - its a job. It hardly ranks up there with being a doctor, lawyer, architect and so on. I'm sure interior designers would like it to be thought of as a profession, but it isn't. (Unless American English calls all jobs professions - so Garbage Collecting is a profession for example). 80.2.194.108 (talk) 11:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I beg to differ. Actually, according to Wikipedia's own definition of "profession", it is "an occupation, vocation or career where specialized knowledge of a subject, field, or science is applied".

Interior Designers usually go through their own college design course, which makes them practically professionals since they have specialized knowledge on that matter. There is no need for rankings, since as long as that person has a specialized knowledge on his job, it is a profession, regardless of stature. Also, Garbage Collecting

can be done by anyone: not everyone needs to study Sanitary Engineering, for instance. In the case when garbage collectors do study Sanitary Engineering, then they can be called professionals. Sang'gre Habagat

I created an account just so I can comment on this appalling comment and help clerify some others. I am an Interior Designer from Canada (now living in Australia) and YES it is a profession!! I know of the legal issues around people calling themselves Interior Designers when they are merely Decorators which I believe is mainly in North America (could be elsewhere but I am not sure). I did not go to school and pay tens of thousands of dollars to have people continue to degrade this profession. Anyone can be a decorator, but unless you have gone through proper training you cannot be an Interior Designer. Interior Design involves creating functional drawing which follow building codes as laid out by the different areas. Are decorator’s proficient in CAD? Or obtain a registered stamp for their drawings? Or able to perform structural changes? NO! But a Professional Interior Designer can! I believe the sooner people understand the VAST differences the better. I do not think Doctors would want to be called Nurses now would they? Even if in some tiny country there is not any legal distinction...so try telling North American Doctors they are not a professional and see what happens. If you read the beginning of the Interior Decoration page it says "Interior decoration or decor is the art of decorating a room so that it is attractive, easy to use, and functions well with the existing architecture." The key word here is EXISTING. An Interior Designer is capable of complete remodels and in North America they are certified to design a building up to 30,000 square feet without an Architect to place their stamp on it (at least I sure am). If you are living in a new residential area...guess what...an Interior Designer most likely designed your home from footing and j-bolts to rafters and eaves. Plus an Interior Designer would ensured that the footings were deep enough below the regional frost line (for northern areas)so that in winter your beloved house does not shift or that in an apartment building your apartment would not burn down because your neighbour left the stove on by ensuring proper graded Fire Resistant drywall separated your dwellings, plus your bathrooms and kitchen would have GFI outlets so that you do not electrocute yourself (I hope this gives you at least an extremely small peek at what we are required to know and apply). The best way to describe it to you cynics is that generally Architect designs the skeleton of large buildings, which could be an office tower, hospital, shopping mall, hotel, etc. and the Interior Designer creates the partitions walls and space(s) inside. If you go to job search sites for many countries you'll realize that Architecture & Design are together and Decorating is usually with Arts. Even if their country does not have the legal guidelines it is obviously well understood. I believe it is the global understanding that an Interior Designer is not an Interior Decorator. So that is what this should be about. The article should describe what Interior Design is and the profession of Interior Design. All you have to do is look up the International Interior Design Association (IIDA) [1] to get a grip on the world’s view of Interior Design and how it is a regulated Profession. RedRacingCar (talk) 06:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I deleted that comment since it is a rant about an organization, not a discussion about this wikipedia article. There are other strong opinions on this discussion page, but they at least relate to the topic of the the article-this one did not. Ifdad3c (talk) 21:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC) this kind of stuff is no help at all!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.181.203.222 (talk) 16:43, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

European External Links

I'd like to suggest addition of two external links to this page:

1) European Council of Interior Architects Founded in 1992 with 14 member associations across Europe including their UK member:

2) Society of British Interior Design

Full disclosure: I am employed as a contractor to create a blog for SBID. I am suggesting these two links as I have been researching mentions of these organisations around the web, neither is listed and I believe they are of notable interest to readers of wikipedia - especially ECIA.

Rather than edit anonymously to include them, I have added the request here and listed my association to SBID on my user page in the hope of avoiding any accusations of COI.

If you wish to contact me via my talk page, please do so. Alukeonlife (talk) 17:10, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Links added. Alukeonlife (talk) 11:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Disciplines Section Photo Caption in a Foreign Language?

As this is a page on the English Wikipedia, many people reading this caption will not understand it. The caption in question reads, (and quote), "挑高店面的室內設計".

If at all possible, can an English translation or information be given for this picture?

Latemporada (talk) 21:11, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

"Working conditions" Amended as article was too wordy, unecylopaedic and was off-focus with extensive reference to travel and reduced need for travel: And the "some would say" sentence was also deleted for the same reason/off topic/unencylopaedic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jivebaby (talk • contribs) 13:25, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Any way we can totally redo this article?

I think we need to find new info that defines interior design on a global scale and then have a small section on american Interior design. I wish to have fresh ideas put into a total overhaul of this wiki article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.119.191.97 (talk) 18:15, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

◌I agree, the whole thing reads like a pamphlet for a career as an interior designer. I even just removed a 'how to get hired' section. DesertPhox (talk) 16:03, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree, of everything I've read on Wikipedia this article is one of the sloppiest. --83.71.56.134 (talk) 12:12, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Degrees & Certificates

A degree in Interior Design is required of interior designer applicants. Those who may want to pursue higher positions in the field may be required to take a master’s degree in Interior Design. Most countries in the world even require Interior Design graduates to pass a licenser exam. Eligibility in taking the licenser exam requires several years of education and experience in the field of Interior Design. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djplz (talk • contribs) 01:25, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

In the United States at least, an interior designer requires a college degree in the field and a license by the state to use the professional term "interior designer" while they practice. An interior decorator does not require these. Most American universities that have interior design programs have them in the same college as their architecture programs and they go through a similar program. With their degrees and licenses an interior designer is qualified to design home interiors in new construction and remodels and many act as a general contractor for some projects. Interior decorators deal mainly with furniture, paint, accessories, etc. Almost all of this is from personal knowledge, however, being a professional in the construction industry, having gotten a degree in construction through an architecture college, and having family members who are interior designers, so I don't know what this information is worth. Joseph5234 (talk) 19:19, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Occasionally, interior design programs are in the Family and Consumer Science College, where the school can also offer related majors like fashion merchandising.Cg5910 (talk) 12:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC)