Talk:Riedel (glass manufacturer)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wine, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.WineWikipedia:WikiProject WineTemplate:WikiProject WineWine articles

Glass High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glass, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of glass 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.GlassWikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Taskforces/GlassTemplate:WikiProject Glassglass articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

Shameless ...[edit]

... advertising. Maikel (talk) 22:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up a bit, but there's still no documentation and nothing on modern history. The layout sucks too. Bellagio99 (talk) 02:12, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, horrible. No references, boring, not at all wiki quality. Please, someone, do something about this! Anuraagt (talk) 22:03, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vivant[edit]

Propose saying the vivant series is less expensive, rather than "cheaper" unless sources are cited indicating that the vivant series is somehow 'cheaper' than, say the vinum - unless the implied lack of lead someone reduces the value/effect of the wine glass. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.128.166.74 (talk) 01:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation?[edit]

Perhaps this article needs a disambiguation note. Riedel is also a surname. Richard David Ramsey 15:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing. Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:32, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki editors - please help![edit]

Wiki editors, this article is really terribly written - few or no citations, very dull, strangely limited in its overview. Can someone please help with this? The article needs a great deal of trimming, and also to be brought up to date. It's not even remotely Wikipedia quality. Anuraagt (talk) 22:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]