Talk:Art toys

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

Toys Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Toys, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of toys 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.ToysWikipedia:WikiProject ToysTemplate:WikiProject ToysToys Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. WikiProject Toys To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Barbie Queen of the Prom, Eve The Second Genesis CCG, More... Assess : Rate the Unassessed Toys articles and Unknown-importance Toys articles. Expand : Expand the doll pages, Expand Larami article Infobox : Toys articles needing infoboxes Photo : Request images that are needed from Wikipedia requested photographs of toys to included in each articles. Stubs : work on stubs in Category:Toy stubs Other : * Tag the talk pages of Toys-related articles with the {{WikiProject Toys}} banner. Help out with articles placed in Category:Toys articles needing attention

I believe that Urban Vinyl should stay separate due to the fact that as Designer toys become more popular they are not always made of vinyl. For example the circus punks and various paper based toys.

Urban vinyl is a subcategory of designer toys and is reflected in this article as such. Comme le Lapin 21:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the 'advertisement' tag in this article is unneccesary. The page does not seem to me to read like an advertisement at all and is very informative apart from the lack of citations. Can this be removed? Russell Dady (talk) 14:01, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is very informative where the toys are concerned, yes, but the style is not in a neutral encyclopedic tone. It's sprinkled throughout with peacock terms like "definitive", "popular", "highly sought-after", see Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms. And a few sentences like "They will be available at most designer toy stores, and are manufactured through a well known designer toy store called Rotofugi." read like straight out advertising. Also, if you look at the history the user who added the advert tag said in the edit summary "Advert, unreferenced - too much just promotion for the toy companies, not enough sourced material on the actual topic" Siawase (talk) 17:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Attempted to remove the move obvious peacock terms to make the style a bit more neutral, see diff [1]. The issue with too much minutiae about the toys remains, but I really don't think it reads like an ad anymore so I'm removing that tag. The NY Times article that's linked in the refs seems like it'd be a great source for adding info on the culture around these toys. Siawase (talk) 17:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! --Ronz (talk) 18:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:FWYLCrew.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:FWYLCrew.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:27, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Based on Google trend information, the term "Art toy" (or "Art toys") has been consistently far more 'popular' than the term "Designer toy" (or "Designer toys") in both worldwide and U.S.-based searches. In light of this, I suggest we move the "Designer toy" page to "Art toy," a term already acknowledged as synonymous in the introductory paragraph. Opening this up for discussion but I'll initiate the move in a week (or so) if there are no valid dissenting opinions. The Ghost of Art Toys Past (talk) 12:22, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]