287:
respectable institutes (RCA London, Sandberg institute
Amsterdam and more) that are leading the research and development of the field, i also tried to find what would be the best way to translate the wiki page to Hebrew and even asked for help in doing so along the years but didn't get any decent response i could actually use in doing so. I would be happy helping add to the existing page and translating it and would be gravely disappointed if it were to be deleted or added to UX which i very vaguely related... hope someone out there is actually going to read this. many thanks. Saron Paz
21:
55:
278:"The core application of experience design is matching what an organizations says with what they do. Communication is delivering a message; experience is the message. If an organization says they make technology friendly, an experience designer would work to make sure that organization's touchpoints are friendly." -
225:
Is something sticking in my craw? No. Why do you think so? Meanwhile, more references would be nice, or perhaps some of the other suggestions I made above. I'm very aware of the immaturity of the field, which is why I specifically asked for experts to help with the cleanup. Thanks for offering to
196:
I'm not happy with the results, but it's a start in the right direction. I cut out portions that I found to be repetitive, overly showy, and/or vague. I also removed the "longest disagreements in the
Experience Design community" as a philosophical discussion poorly suited for an encyclopedia entry.
286:
All i can add to the discussion (new to editing
Knowledge to hope i'm doing this right) is that the experience design page on Knowledge had a great impact on me when i was looking for my way and today i am happy to call myself an experience designer, there are also interesting academic programs in
273:
I think this article could use information regarding the applications of experience design. I am an
Experience Designer and my company has a short article on experience design which could be helpful here. I don't want to contribute to the link spam. So I am posting this in the discussion. --Corey
236:
May I ask the author of the "Focus
Debated" section to rethink their presentation? I am unaware of any "debate". I think I understand what you're aiming for - its a multi-disciplinary field so its hard to say what's the "right" perspective. However, I don't know any designer who would say Don
212:
As one of this article's secondary authors, I don't believe it's "grandiose and vague." The authors are practitioners and most of the work being done in this field is being done now. The scholars of experience design have yet to identify themselves. However, if
96:
The article as currently "revised" is anorexic and the debate focused on, wrongly presented. But who has the time these days to educate when it's all about confrontation? As one of its original owners, I find it no longer fun or interesting. Maybe later. --
237:
Norman's perspective is wrong. I don't believe encyclopedias should promote straw men unless discussing straw men per se. Also, Don Norman is not a design practitioner (which I take to mean "designer") - he's a design critic. --
324:. I might take care of this, but to be frank I find it very hard to find anything in this page which isn't pure bafflegab. Can anyone indicate what if anything has any actual meaning here?
186:
I'm gonna give a stab at making it more like an encyclopedia entry, less like the essay/ad that it is now. I'd hoped others would have contributed more since I added the cleanup tag. --
140:
The article does need attention by experts to help with removing original research, providing information from verifiable sources, and clarifing the language and points.
65:
197:
Hopefully, this will encourage more discussion and editing. In hindsight, I should have probably made more, smaller edits to make all the changes clearer. --
245:
I think Don Noman's perspective is wrong. Among other things, he focuses far too much on (often trivial) problems, and usually glosses over solutions. --
217:
will identify the points that stick in his craw, including points that he believes need citing, I'd be glad to undertake the effort. --
254:
Don is a design practitioner and educator. He uses criticism as a means to draw attention to as well as investigate design issues. --
177:
Anyone else think the article is both grandiose and vague? Lots of buzzwords and impressive claims, but lacking real detail. --
302:
84:
40:
on April 12, 2019 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see
61:
146:
Most importantly, the article needs to be organized into concise sections, which may require some expertise. --
321:
314:
37:
298:
137:
I looked around for cleanup tags and how to use them, but am giving up after finding nothing helpful...
218:
98:
290:
294:
54:
329:
238:
33:
279:
263:
Yes, the "Focus
Debated" section should be reworked, as could the rest of this article. --
325:
156:
The links to MakingMeaning should be removed, replaced with a proper book reference. --
120:
116:
112:
83:
The article, with it's lack of citations, appears to be original research. See
264:
255:
246:
227:
214:
198:
187:
178:
166:
157:
147:
124:
88:
333:
306:
267:
258:
249:
230:
201:
190:
181:
169:
160:
150:
127:
101:
91:
320:
The AFD for this article closed in
December 2018 calling for a merge into
49:
15:
111:
The article is the target of regular linkspam. Please see
41:
28:
143:The article also needs formatting, and rephrasing.
8:
288:
7:
64:on 28 November 2018. The result of
282:--Corey Julihn 10:49, 11 June 2007
14:
53:
19:
60:This article was nominated for
231:21:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
202:20:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
191:18:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
85:Knowledge:No_original_research
1:
307:22:48, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
268:17:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
259:17:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
250:17:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
102:07:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
274:Julihn 10:49, 11 June 2007
182:18:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
170:21:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
161:21:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
151:21:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
128:15:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
349:
334:22:25, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
280:What is Experience Design
92:01:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
322:User experience design
315:User experience design
38:User experience design
221:, 12 September 2006
26:The contents of the
241:, 16 February 2007
309:
293:comment added by
76:
75:
48:
47:
29:Experience design
340:
57:
50:
31:
23:
22:
16:
348:
347:
343:
342:
341:
339:
338:
337:
318:
210:
135:
109:
81:
79:Article quality
27:
20:
12:
11:
5:
346:
344:
317:
311:
284:
283:
271:
270:
261:
252:
234:
233:
209:
206:
205:
204:
175:
174:
173:
172:
134:
131:
108:
105:
80:
77:
74:
73:
66:the discussion
58:
46:
45:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
345:
336:
335:
331:
327:
323:
316:
312:
310:
308:
304:
300:
296:
292:
281:
277:
276:
275:
269:
266:
262:
260:
257:
253:
251:
248:
244:
243:
242:
240:
232:
229:
224:
223:
222:
220:
216:
207:
203:
200:
195:
194:
193:
192:
189:
184:
183:
180:
171:
168:
164:
163:
162:
159:
155:
154:
153:
152:
149:
144:
141:
138:
132:
130:
129:
126:
122:
118:
114:
106:
104:
103:
100:
94:
93:
90:
86:
78:
71:
67:
63:
59:
56:
52:
51:
43:
39:
35:
30:
25:
18:
17:
319:
289:— Preceding
285:
272:
235:
219:Bob Jacobson
211:
185:
176:
145:
142:
139:
136:
110:
99:Bob Jacobson
95:
82:
69:
313:Merge into
42:its history
32:page were
326:Pinkbeast
295:Saron paz
303:contribs
291:unsigned
226:help. --
208:Response
165:Done! --
133:Cleanup?
107:Linkspam
62:deletion
121:WP:SPAM
239:MarkYo
119:, and
117:WP:NOT
34:merged
113:WP:EL
70:merge
36:into
330:talk
299:talk
265:Ronz
256:Ronz
247:Ronz
228:Ronz
215:Ronz
199:Ronz
188:Ronz
179:Ronz
167:Ronz
158:Ronz
148:Ronz
125:Ronz
123:. --
89:Ronz
87:. --
68:was
332:)
305:)
301:•
115:,
328:(
297:(
72:.
44:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
