Jump to content

Talk:Mick DeGiulio

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

I've read through the guidelines and am at a loss as to why such a notable designer would not be an automatic add. I've gone back through the text and added many links to the firms and professionals where he's had a seminal creative impact on their industries. SieMatic, Kohler, and SubZero are all here on Wiki. So, too, are kitchen designers half his age who would never have had a career without DeGiulio having created an industry that little existed before (see the Wiki page for the talented, but less historically notable Troy Adams). As the quote from SubZero says, this is the man who put "design" in "kitchen design" and professionalized an industry that used to be a scattering of cabinet sellers. All references listed are distinguished newspapers and interior design publications. I could add HGTV, but that is a less notable source in the design field.

Perhaps I can request that an editor with expertise in interior and/or product design review this page? Karinhedwards (talk) 22:43, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion into Wikipedia is based solely on the Wikipedia defined notability of the individual. That notability is defined in WP:N, WP:BIO, and WP:GNG and must be supported by reliable sources. A review of GHits and GNEWS provides no substantial coverage of the individual. I have tried to confirm the coverage you listed, but I have not been able to find any of the referenced articles. You are more than welcome to ask that someone with kitchen design experience review the article, but the article appears to fail Wikipedia based criteria for notability. ttonyb (talk) 22:57, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Additional possible sources

[edit]

There exist at least three profiles of him, more material about his work (a significant portion of a creative person's biography) and many interviews. There presumably are more, considering these searches usually go through at most a decade worth of archives, usually less, and most behind paywalls. Thus I'm removing the prod. --Danger (talk) 19:18, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Using References

[edit]

Everything posted on Wikipedia needs to have a reliable source that can be used for verification. These references should be used inline rather then just so people can see what statement they are being used to validate. If you are unfamiliar with the syntax required for inline citations, take a look at various other articles on Wikipedia and then use the "Edit" button to see how they were formatted. I would also recommend looking at the Wikipedia:Citation_templates page to get the full syntax.

Keep in mind that you will need some references to establish "notability" and others to establish "facts". Primary sources are OK to establish facts but not notability. For example, if you state that Mick DeGiulio was born in 1953 you would need a source to back that up, and a primary source would be OK. But if you state that Mick DeGiulio is "widely recognized for ..." you would need secondary sources to establish that.

Most of the references used in this article are not online, so it's very difficult for editors to validate them. So, it would be better if you were to quote the page number of the publication where the info was found and quote the statement that you are using as a citation. For example, if you have a publication from a reliable source that states "Mick DeGiulio is widely recognized for ..." then quote it in the citation.

The inline citations that you use will all magically appear in your References section if you include the {{Reflist}} tag there.

Hope this is helpful. Robman94 (talk) 18:08, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Revisions Completed Thank you for your assistance. The recommended inline citations have been added, referencing notable and reliable sources, and the number of external links have been reduced (the external links that remain are substantive and relevant to the article content). With these updates, is it possible to remove the notations regarding sourcing and external links? Also, please advise what type highlighted in red indicates. These are other pages that exist on Wikipedia.Karinhedwards (talk) 21:34, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mick DeGiulio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:20, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mick_DeGiulio&oldid=1201426818"