Talk:The Designers Republic

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

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

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Graphic design Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Graphic design, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of graphic design-related subjects 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.Graphic designWikipedia:WikiProject Graphic designTemplate:WikiProject Graphic designGraphic design articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments[edit]

I don't see it, unless the article is referring to how some of their art takes some inspiration from urban grafitti style? Seems a little presumptive to me; an example or two in the article that leaves little doubt about their "anti-establishment" and/or "controversial" status could clarify things a bit. --69.234.233.69 06:58, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I agree with what was said above.

I also agree. But someone who have time to do something about it should. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Docljunior (talk • contribs) 23:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Besides that: a mention of the ongoing struggle between constructive (larger clients) and de-constructive (Warp mostly) approaches in their designs, especially around 2000, prior to Michael Place's departure.

This article has way too much attempt at criticism and editorial analysis, not enough factual info. Nelson 09:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This article noodles off into commentary and yet somehow manages to try to cover DR without even a single snippet of all their incredibly influential work for Pop Will Eat Itself. The closest it comes is a Wipeout screenshot. Bollinger 20:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As an added note, the main menus from DiRT seem to be rather DR inspired. Any way we can find out if DR did it? Bollinger 20:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

God their website is obnoxious :x Given their great work with things like wipeout you'd think they could come up with something better than a customer-deflecting flash site. Is there any other site with official information like what should be on their site? I can't find much of anything on there. --67.160.118.193 (talk) 13:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What?[edit]

Because of the anti-capitalist tendencies in its work, the company has a majority of its clients in the music and entertainment industries...

Does this really make any sense? The music and entertainment industries are not "anti-capitalist" by any stretch of the imagination, so I don't see how companies in these fields would be more receptive to stuff by TDR. Besides that, they're apparently doing a commercial for Coke now, so I'd recommend removing this sentence altogether.
-- Ultra Megatron 01:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:AutechreIncunabula.jpeg[edit]

Image:AutechreIncunabula.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:55, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Fs appetitefordisctruction.jpg[edit]

The image Image:Fs appetitefordisctruction.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --20:56, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing[edit]

This page is a mess now, someone with obviosuly no history (user ip page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/79.121.193.183) editing has come and screwed it all up, although at the same time they added a whole bunch of usfull info so I will try and sort it out now. ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(^Ταλκ) 20:54, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Much of this written by TDR?[edit]

This is just a guess, but if I didn't know better I'd say that a lot of this was probably added by somebody from TDR with the wording. It just seems to overly praise the company, and some of these numbers (like the day the company was founded) seem so precise. I'd be surprised if anybody else not involved with them even knew the exact day, at least not without doing a fair amount of research. Not that somebody from the company adding data is necessarily a bad thing, but it should seem far more neutral. 24.107.102.129 (talk) 07:59, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreeing with the previous statement, the entire page reads as an ego-trip for TDR, praising their anti-consumerist tendencies without providing justification or citation. Someone needs to rewrite this page in a more passive, objective tone. The highly biased view presented doesn't seem to provide objective information to any high degree, aside from providing a general overview of the company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.109.146.96 (talk) 15:52, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]