User talk:RandomCritic/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Leigh Brackett articles

Hello,

Stylistically, your planet articles (Mars, etc) are not written in a way that clearly distinguishes fact and fiction. In fact, they seem to intentionally imitate the non-fiction articles about Mars, etc. This creates a certain confusion. These should probably be written more like, say, Barsoom or Red Mars/Blue Mars/Green Mars. -- Curps 03:00, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

In other words, you seem to have written the articles as though they were non-fiction topics taken from some fictional encyclopedia, whereas they really should read like fiction topics in a non-fictional encyclopedia (Wikipedia). -- Curps 03:19, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Space Opera

Hey, RC, I noticed your edit to Space Opera got reverted. In my opinion, that was incorrect, since it looked like your edit was perhaps not your POV but a quote from Mr. Tucker. However, that wasn't real clear from what you wrote. If that was a quote, could you put it back in with attribution? Zabieru 20:31, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Having looked at that page, I'm hard pressed to figure out why anyone would think this was an attempt at vandalism. --Iustinus 08:58, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Yea, I was watching the entire drama from afar. Actually I'm glad someone is putting some good work into the article. A lot of people don't know what it means, so it's good to have a solid article. Nice work!
As to your comments on the talk page at Space Opera, I moved them to the bottom of the page. It's a convention to put new discussion comments at the bottom of the page. If you put them at the top they are likely to get missed, and might also accidentally get archived. Just FYI. --DanielCD 20:48, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orcs and Such

I'm still a bit confused.

We have 7th century newly Christian literate Anglo Saxons being taught that Latin 'Orcus' is OE 'thyrs' and 'heldeofols' (giants and hell-devils, of course), and we have Beowulf, wherein appears 'orcneas' (written in the 12th century). That is, 500 years later, we have 'orcneas' (and not as a gloss). Are we to suppose that Orcus stayed a foreign word, distinct, for 500 years, to be borrowed by the Beowulf author on the spot? Or is it easier to think that the word was in use, somehow, alone or in compounds, such that the 12th century author certainly had an 'orky-thing' in his head (though we need not think the same of Beowulf himself)?

It's not that one is simply being reasonable to propose this - rather, it's that that is what the philologists have decided is reasonable: this is why they translate it as demon-corpse (or similar) and not Orcus-corpse (though that has a ring to it). So, it might be worth mentioning in relevant articles.

You did not note that the etymology for 'ogre' claims that the word may be a deliberate 'frankification' of Italian 'orco' (perhaps via an Italian dialect, in 1697, by the creator of Mother Goose and a host of other fairy-tales). That might knock 'ogre' out of mention-contention altogether. The Orcus=Thyrs and orcneas jobs are the thing (that, I reckon, and Tolkien's own exposure to Mother Goose, Orlando Furioso and Milton, where the phonetics would have kept dripping into his ... unconscious.) -- black thorn of brethil 12:11, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


p.s. you have the amazing ability to edit things at the exact moment I finalize my edits, comments, etc. Exasperating. black thorn of brethil 12:15, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

The plot thickens. The story ought to be 'Corvetto' by Giambattista. But there is another source - Straparola. 'Huerco' is coming up as the Italian word used in these folktales. Reading is being done at this very moment. Amendations will be made. black thorn of brethil 18:54, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List_of_fictional_universes#Motion_to_Revise

Hi! Please see: List_of_fictional_universes#Motion_to_Revise, Thanks FrankB 14:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please join in

Wikipedia:Locations in fiction, fictional locations, and settings is a proposed policy on how to list fictional locations and to differentiate between a physical place and a setting (ie. universe or world). Please join in and give your thoughts.
—Lady Aleena talk/contribs 05:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC) PS. Bring some friends!

[edit] List of fictional astronauts

Dude, you rock! --Roland 19:07, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of Narnian creatures

I restored the information on "ankle biters" or whatever from the Narnian creature list, but added an introductory sentence explaining that these creatures were created by disney. I did this as per the discussion on the talk page of that article. Personally, removing them entirely wouldn't bother me either, but we should probably get some consensus and change the name of the article first. I also added the same intro to the Rhino entry. LloydSommerer 18:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Narnia

Hello, I noticed that you edited an article related to The Chronicles of Narnia. I thought you may be interested in knowing that there is a WikiProject working to improve articles about Narnia, your help would be greatly appreciated. Please consider joining the WikiProject Narnia. Thank you! Bornagain4 01:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of fictional astronauts

Hello and thanks for the correction on List of fictional astronauts. Also, what is the method for ordering the lines in each of the tables? At first it seemed to me to be when the given mission was taking place, but it looks (at least in the Futuristic section) that they are in order of where a given mission is taking place relative to Earth. Your thoughts? --EarthPerson 15:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Madeleine L'Engle fictional locations

Do you think it would be a good idea for me to do an article (or sub-article or something) on fictional places in the writing of Madeleine L'Engle? Besides the planets you moved into the A Wrinkle in Time article, there are a couple of unnamed planets in that book, a theoretical construct "planet" in A Wind in the Door, several fictional villages and cities, at least three fictional islands, and a fictional South American country (which appears in two books). I have background and quotes related to several of these. Do you think that's enough to justify a short article? I don't want to put it in the author article, because it's already too much about her fictional characters and not enough about the author. Thanks. By the way, I think you do a great job tending the List of fictional planets. Karen | Talk | contribs 00:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The alphabetical list of planets in science fiction

In a message to me about Planets in science fiction, you said "The alphabetical list is only for cases where just one or two planets are mentioned in a given work or series." I have several issues with this statement.

1. An alphabetical list implies a list of all items. You would never see an "Alphabetical List of Nations" where some of the nation were pulled out into a separate section of "those whose people speak German (or English, or Chinese)", while the others are dumped into a miscellaneous alphabetical listing. In my opinion, an encyclopedia would list them all. Perhaps in the "German" article would be a list of all nations that speak German.

2. If an alphabetical list is not comprehensive, then it is not useful for browsing. Somehow, you must "know" to look for some planets in one section and others in another section. If I'm looking for a planet from a book but cannot remember the name, I must currently browse through 25 different pages.

3. The criteria for inclusion in the Literature list are unstated and inconsistent. For example, only Asimov's Foundation planets are included -- where do his other planets go? And all of Heinlein's planets are lumped together -- why don't his Future History planets get their own category? How many planets must a universe/author/series have to qualify? How do you handle planets that are found in multiple media? For example, Star Trek planets might be found under Television, Film, Animation, or Books. I can see disagreements every time a few more planets are added.

Despite everything I have said above, I have no problem with separate lists of planets from various universes/authors/series; in fact I think it's a great idea. I just don't see why those planets should be removed from the alphabetical list.

The creation of a Jane's All The World's Worlds or a Worlds Almanac has been a goal of mine for decades and Wikipedia seems perfect for it. I have a couple of thousand planets to add and would like to have at least some confidence in what the final result would look like before I do all that work.

Regards, Cwogle 17:13, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Weinbaum stories chronological list

Is "Wonder" short for Thrilling Wonder Stories? (The magazine titles need to be italicized, too.) Is the Posthumous Press item a chapbook or part of an anthology or...?--Orange Mike 21:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] proposed merge: Aldebaran in fiction

I have proposed merging Aldebaran in fiction into the main article, Aldebaran. I'd appreciate any input on Talk:Aldebaran_in_fiction#merge_into_Aldebaran. Regards, —AldeBaer 15:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Replied there. —AldeBaer 21:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
First off: I see what you mean regarding usage of the term "content forking", my mistake entirely. What I meant to say was that while the stars in fiction articles are indeed spinoff articles, their merit as such isn't clear to me, and so far you have failed to provide any argument. The problem I see, as opposed to trying to "create" one, as you put it, is simply that there is no need to have the articles split - and the default is obviously not to split unless there is a reason, which you so far have not provided.
You didn't reply to this part of my posting: Let's simply add all the relevant star articles to the category after the "big merging", what's the problem? Wrt to "large amount of fictional material": It's not that much material (let alone sufficient subject matter to write a coherent article, in most cases) and it's directly related to the astronomical knowledge about the existence of those stars." - Can I take your failure to respond to this as agreement with my points?
Another thing: You could be more civil, really. The threatening tone of "You'll get more than enough input if you try to implement your proposed merge", combined with this message to user:Jyril, referring to a "grand plan" of mine, proves that sufficiently. As I understand it, you have split off the "in fiction" articles in the first place ("would leave us back where we started"). Why didn't you just explain that in a calm tone? I'm just that guy, I'm not intending to destroy anyone's work here, that's why I notified you of the proposal in the first place.
You appeared to be on the defensive right from the start, as if I was an attacker of some kind. With that in mind, I kindly suggest rereading WP:OWN. One thing I didn't quite understand is your claim that I intend on "dumping all of the "Aldebaran in fiction" refs into Aldebaran" - I don't remember saying anything like that. In fact, I repeatedly said that there are no references whatsoever in Aldebaran in fiction - in other words: What is there to "dump"?
Regards, —AldeBaer 01:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
"baseless accusations of incivility" - Not baseless. Please don't say things like what I quoted above.
"agitating for a very large-scale restructuring of Wikipedia, and doing so in a way that seems to be to be quite aggressive" - Agitating? Quite aggressive? I have no idea what you mean, but it's not trivial to say things like that to another user.
Regarding the rest: Have it your way then, it was just an attempt to improve something I recognise as a minor problem. You have not convinced me a bit with regard to "in fiction" articles, I still think all of those should be sections in their main article. But experience tells me that this is the point to close this unfruitful debate and not pursue the matter further. Have a nice day, —AldeBaer 02:53, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I've closed the discussion as "no consensus" [1] and removed the merge templates [2][3]. —AldeBaer (c) 02:11, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Aldebaran

Hello. I'm just letting you know that I am restoring my addition to the "Aldebaran in fiction" entry regarding Ben Hur. The horse is indeed named after the star, as are the other horses on the chariot team. Further, not all the entries on the page (e.g., Aldeberan ticklers, a planet in some star system, etc.) refer directly to the star, so my addition was certainly in the spirit of the page. Please discuss this with me if you have further objections if you wish to remove it again. The page to which you linked (in your edit summary) is for "things that have little or nothing to do with the objects themselves," which is decidedly not the case here. I appreciate this, and thank you. ◄Zahakiel► 14:28, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

That makes sense... I'll shift the entry. ◄Zahakiel► 15:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] AfD nomination of Comets in popular culture

Comets in popular culture, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Comets in popular culture satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comets in popular culture and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Comets in popular culture during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Eyrian 19:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Astronomical names in popular culture

Astronomical names in popular culture, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Astronomical names in popular culture satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Astronomical names in popular culture and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Astronomical names in popular culture during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Eyrian 17:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Planet killer

Hi, I am trying to rewrite Planet killer in light of the AfD. I've started a user subpage at User:Wl219/List of fictional weapons of mass destruction and would appreciate your comments. Thanks. Wl219 20:46, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Farscape planets

I have nominated Category:Farscape planets (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Dragon Ball planets

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article List of Dragon Ball planets, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 04:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of List of Dragon Ball planets

An editor has nominated List of Dragon Ball planets, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dragon Ball planets and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 11:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)