Talk:Neville Brody
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled edit
Considering Brody's influence on graphic design I think this page is appauling. I'll quite shortly (tomorow hopefully) have access to a wide variety of Brody related sources and I shall update the page in duely.Thomfilm 13:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Right: we read "revolutionary", "challenging", "pushing the boundaries", etc., etc.: this sounds more like corporate advertising than an encyclopedia article. What (if anything) does this stuff mean? -- Hoary 11:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
You're right. This entry is absurb - a small amount is even factually incorrect. It sounds like a design student's first project. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.24.64 (talk) 01:12, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
The Graphic Language2 edit
I was having trouble determining whether the book "The Graphic Language of Neville Brody 2" was a sequel, or merely a reprinting of, the first book. (Even the publisher's site doesn't mention the v.2 edition!). I finally found this article, which explains that it is indeed a proper sequel. Just noting. -- Quiddity (talk) 21:15, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Dispassionate encyclopedic language edit
Several descriptions of Brody's artistic work are too flowery, containing artistic jargon and unsourced personal assessments about feelings and intentions. Wikipedia is not an arts magazine and should focus on dry verifiable facts. Subjective assessments and artistic reviews of his work must be sourced and directly attributed to acknowledged experts (usually as quotation). GermanJoe (talk) 17:12, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah, the "Business and Typography" section reads like one blatant selling blurb, it's miles off sober and verifiable encyclopedic language: "Brody was also partly responsible for instigating the fusion between a magazine, graphics design and typeface design. The magazine ranges in themes from "Codes" and "Runes" to "Religion" and "Pornography." the exploration and freedom that the publishers exhibit is undeniable and exciting. (!!) The conventions upturned in FUSE are prescient in their definition of new standards.[5] Each package includes a publication with articles relating to typography and surrounding subjects, four brand new fonts that are unique and revolutionary in some shape or form and four posters..." Really? 80.216.104.217 (talk) 22:08, 16 October 2018 (UTC)