Talk:Red Dot

This article was nominated for deletion on 29 January 2008. The result of the discussion was delete.

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Industrial design Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Deletion

How come this page wasn't deleted per discussion? --88.148.220.242 (talk) 14:07, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted on Feb 4, 2008 per the AFD discussion (log) and a new article was created on Feb 16. --Muchness (talk) 14:55, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd normally redelete immediately, but the delete discussion was extremely weak. Notwithstanding the cruftiness of the article, the Red Dot award is indeed notable and prominent, in Germany at least, where payment for the right to display an award or review logo is a longstanding practice (any product with a favorable Stiftung Warentest review inevitably bears its logo, for example). ProhibitOnions ^(T) 08:56, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Hello 10mmsocket, I have seen that you have reverted my edit.[1] I would like to improve the article's quality and make it a decent Wikipedia article with proper references to good reliable secondary sources. The article has, in its current state, only 9 references to sources, of which I deem most not acceptable, which is also reflected by the warning in the lead section.

I think it's without a doubt that this needs fixing. I have cited substantially more sources, and I have put emphasis on sources that are not closely associated with Red Dot. Please note that my version has such a huge increase in byte size because about 14,000 bytes of my addition are just references, i.e. the text addition is significantly less "radical" than what it might seem.

I believe that the current version is not ideal because it completely omits the history, and because it barely describes the Red Dot award in its current state. It also contains factual inaccuracies. When writing the new version of the article, I tried sticking to Wikipedia's good article criteria as good as possible. Could you do me a favour and have another look at my version to check whether certain parts still need amending? I would really appreciate it. Best, --Felix Guattari (talk) 10:15, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that you have a conflict of interest. Your edits were not neutral in nature. If you want to improve the article then make specific suggestions here and hopefully another editor will pick them up and add to the article. 10mmsocket (talk) 16:03, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's lazy gatekeeping. I wish I'd seen this conversation before I bothered looking for references last week. I went through the edit and it's fine, OP obviously knows the house and did a good job (I've also added the infobox, and made some minor clean up). Popo le Chien ^{throw a bone} 07:30, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This being said, hogging the red dot article name seems a bit excessive (and also inconsistent with the actual full name as well as the German entry's title). I'll ask for a move to Red Dot Design Award unless there's any strong opposition. Popo le Chien ^{throw a bone} 07:52, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]