Talk:Peter Saville (graphic designer)

Factory Logo

Someone named Howard Cheng claims Saville's Factory Logo as his own work.

Unless Howard Cheng created that logo pre-1986, he's a liar. Or it's a complete coincidence. Saville created that logo circa 1986 - this is easily verified. 'Designed by Peter Saville', Princeton University Press, 2003. Or, just look at any Factory record released between 1986 - 1989. User: ponobo, May 10, 2007

Potential vandalism

A user (Ddr678) seems to have vandalised a section of this document- see kentucky/london and janitor/design director in the last two or three revisions. Pretty sure that London and Design Director are the right versions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.104.91.187 (talk) 14:09, August 21, 2007 (UTC)

Please reassess the article Peter_Saville_(artist)

1. Peter_Saville_(artist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - I recently modified a bit of the Peter Saville article, and then noticed it was assessed as 'stub-class', which by comparison to some other random articles seemed undue. I therefore request a reassessment to 'start-class' or even 'C-class' (I can't place an internal LINK to the Wikipedia definition of each of the classes here, there seems to be none existing... So I refer to the more general page named Assessment).

I elected to place this very same text on a page of each of 5 projects (Graphic design, Visual arts, Albums, Biography, Business) that COULD be involved in the process of evaluating the article (it took me about an HOUR to find out about the relevant projects and their assessment particulars by process of going through the whole categories/portals/projects structure of Wikipedia). This in itself reflects on the poor inter-organization of WikiProjects: who SHOULD be responsible to assess the said article? HOW should I find out as a casual user? What if EACH of the 5 projects decide to assess it at the same time (I'm looking forward to THAT)? WHY are the Business and Visual Arts projects solely interested in 'Unassessed' articles but not in reassessment? By the way the Graphic design project does not seem to KNOW that it is part of the larger Visual arts project (at least it does not say so on its own web page)... (seems I goofed here) I find it all a bit comical, to say the least. (Note- yes, you will ask: 'dumb ass', why don't YOU (me) assess the damn article if you are so intelligent and blabla...; well damzels and sirs, I won't in this case; I feel I don't know enough about the rating system yet, and besides I don't know enough about Peter Saville as a subject.) Thanks, --Alainr345 (talk) 23:32, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Do you want your money back? Johnbod (talk) 02:04, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

That was very funny! Ty 09:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not, but I'm replacing Albums (they don't WANT it) by England, Peter Saville is still English right? --Alainr345 (talk) 06:29, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, it's now start class. These gradings are only approximate there to help further organisation of editing and other tasks. Ty 09:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. The Business project all seem to have been made redundant. Biography will get round to it. Some people only rate for projects they belong to, others for all. It wasn't tagged by us, though I don't suppose we would actually reject it. We have ?0,000 articles and ? or ?0 active editors who do bursts of assessing, so the thing does not run like clockwork. Johnbod (talk) 13:13, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

OK let me recap here, I'm new to this business:

1- I requested an assessment on said article to 5 WikiProjects. I did not take a look at the talk page before, should I had done so I would have seen that the page was 'owned' by the Biography project.

2- But it turns out my mistake had a different effect: Biography did not react, but somebody else did (see below).

3- Business is out of the picture and England well I guess there mostly interested in the Queen...

4- So that leaves Visual Arts and Graphic Design and that's where it gets tricky: a couple of Visual Arts guys got into the action and the talk page of said article was tagged as a Graphic Design thing, even though these guys are NOT part of the Graphic Design WikiProject!!?? Wow, am I dreaming or what...

5- The talk page was also tagged as 'start-class' (thanks guys) but the page itself REMAINS a 'stub-class'. Mumbo jumbo now I'm totally lost!... (sorry I goofed) --Alainr345 (talk) 20:33, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Artist or Designer

Would anyone object to moving this article from Peter Saville (artist) to Peter Saville (designer)? I think that that would more accurately reflect his work. UnkleFester (talk) 19:18, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

As there have been no objections, I've moved the page. Ty 09:57, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Joy Division Guardian source

• https://www.theguardian.com/music/gallery/2011/may/29/joydivision-neworder

czar 11:55, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Peter Saville (graphic designer). 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.btinternet.com/~comme6/saville/biography.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928104926/http://showstudio.com/projects/sav/sav_start.html to http://showstudio.com/projects/sav/sav_start.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060514081130/http://www.imon.co.uk/saville/index.html to http://www.imon.co.uk/saville/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713011950/http://www.ilovedesign.com/us/exclusives/?interview=9 to http://www.ilovedesign.com/us/exclusives/?interview=9

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 02:35, 1 December 2017 (UTC)