Talk:List of glass artists

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glass, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of glass 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.GlassWikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Taskforces/GlassTemplate:WikiProject Glassglass
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Lists

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

[Untitled]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

I've removed all red links. Redlinks do not establish notability, which is the basic requirement for Lists of People. If the issue is the fact there are other language wikis with information that can be transfered, I believe there are projects where that can be requested for translation, or at the very least required articles can be listed at Wikipedia:Requested articles. MickMacNee (talk) 02:27, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Ivy

To whom it may concern: There is a YouTube video showing the artistic skills of American-Japanese glass blower, Peter Ivy. If someone has the time, perhaps a Wikipedia article can be written about him. See Peter Ivy - Top Glass Worker in Japan. Enjoy!-Davidbena (talk) 14:30, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube is not a reliable source WP:RS Please do not add non-notable redlinked artists to this. Thank you. Netherzone (talk) 21:21, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]