Talk:Thomas Thwaites (designer)

missing conclusion

it might be a bit tricky with living persons curriculums, but i still find it that the article misses some obvious hint at the nature of work of this person. while mention of the ignobel prize is somewhat telling, the article still should say something more explicit along the line that he used his work mostly to make a living off the attention directed at him without actually engaging into anything that would have practical implications. now understanding that WP needs 2-ry sources for saying something it might be the case that the lack of such sources can be taken as a hint at notability (other than a media personage), eg the lack thereof. but then the article should read as a description of an attention-hunter media phenomenon person and not as a person doing design, engineering, or anything of that sort. even if he himself calls what he does designing, or engineering, or building stuff that doesnt mean that what he describes so is appreciated as such by the secondary sources that can be used to descibe his occupation. just having a training in the designing field also no warrant that his occupation should be called design, or something similar. 89.134.199.32 (talk) 21:37, 21 March 2019 (UTC).