Talk:2162: Literary Opinions - Revision history

172.69.160.150 at 13:59, 15 July 2019

2019-07-15T13:59:50Z

141.101.69.81 at 23:10, 18 June 2019

2019-06-18T23:10:26Z

Probably not Douglas Hofstadter: Added a comment.

2019-06-16T04:06:57Z

Added a comment.

Comet at 07:14, 15 June 2019

2019-06-15T07:14:51Z

Comet: You cannot tell an author by differing subject matter of noted books.

2019-06-15T06:00:02Z

You cannot tell an author by differing subject matter of noted books.

NiceGuy1 at 03:50, 15 June 2019

2019-06-15T03:50:16Z

162.158.106.144: literature map search suggests that people who like one of these authors likely to read others

2019-06-13T18:01:32Z

literature map search suggests that people who like one of these authors likely to read others

Ianrbibtitlht at 12:43, 13 June 2019

2019-06-13T12:43:15Z

Ianrbibtitlht at 12:42, 13 June 2019

2019-06-13T12:42:02Z

Lupo at 12:17, 13 June 2019

2019-06-13T12:17:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:59, 15 July 2019
Line 47:		Line 47:

	Similar ideas to comics 1970 and the title text on 1277. Should definitely be mentioned in the explanation. [[User:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter\|Probably not Douglas Hofstadter]] ([[User talk:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter\|talk]]) 04:06, 16 June 2019 (UTC)		Similar ideas to comics 1970 and the title text on 1277. Should definitely be mentioned in the explanation. [[User:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter\|Probably not Douglas Hofstadter]] ([[User talk:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter\|talk]]) 04:06, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
		+
		+	How about AA Milne and EA Milne. CR, Virginia

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:10, 18 June 2019
Line 30:		Line 30:
	: Anybody writing here actually read these authors? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.144\|162.158.106.144]] 18:01, 13 June 2019 (UTC)		: Anybody writing here actually read these authors? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.144\|162.158.106.144]] 18:01, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

		+	These authors have all been identified as "favorite author for young, mostly white males who wants to be cool and also exude toxic masculinity and won't stop talking about them to be seen as smart/edgy with their books about graphic content and drug abuse". While they are in fact popular with those readers and that kinda sucks, they don't deserve to be criticized without reading them (and, in my opinion, see that those readers skip completly the point on generational malaise these authors make). Cueball dubitative reaction and proposition to see what are the differences inside the books, plus the phrase about "a book club for the books you refuse to read", seems to be a rejection of the fact that some people are amalgaming this toxic readership with the books/authors themselves, and in reaction refuse to read them and see them as having the same content or ideology (they don't).
		+
	How about the theory that Mary Pearson, Andre Norton, Andrew North, Allen Weston, and M. D. Herter are the same person. ;-) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.144\|162.158.106.144]] 22:31, 12 June 2019 (UTC)		How about the theory that Mary Pearson, Andre Norton, Andrew North, Allen Weston, and M. D. Herter are the same person. ;-) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.144\|162.158.106.144]] 22:31, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:06, 16 June 2019
Line 43:		Line 43:
	E.B. and T.H. are distinguishable as one wrote a children's book ("Chitty Chitty Bang Bang") and the other wrote James Bond novels. Oh wait, that was Ian Fleming. James Bond was the author of "Birds of the West Indies." I think the explanation of various audiences and subject matter does not disambiguate authors. See "Ambrose, Gardner and Doyle" by Raymond Smullyan.		E.B. and T.H. are distinguishable as one wrote a children's book ("Chitty Chitty Bang Bang") and the other wrote James Bond novels. Oh wait, that was Ian Fleming. James Bond was the author of "Birds of the West Indies." I think the explanation of various audiences and subject matter does not disambiguate authors. See "Ambrose, Gardner and Doyle" by Raymond Smullyan.
	[[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 06:00, 15 June 2019 (UTC)		[[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 06:00, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
		+
		+	Similar ideas to comics 1970 and the title text on 1277. Should definitely be mentioned in the explanation. [[User:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter\|Probably not Douglas Hofstadter]] ([[User talk:Probably not Douglas Hofstadter\|talk]]) 04:06, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 This happens A LOT in forum postings, e.g., when there is an article about some scientific dicovery on a popular news site, and then people start discussing (and fighting) about that discovery in the forums for this article. These discussions are more often than not based purely on speculation, without anyone bothering to check the original publication on which the article was based, or even without any specialist knowledge about the subject matter at hand. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.19|162.158.89.19]] 09:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
-E.B. and T.H. are distinguishable as one wrote a children's book ("Chitty Chitty Bang Bang") and the other wrote James Bond novels.  Oh wait, that was Ian Fleming.  James Bond was the author of "Birds of the West Indies."  I think the explanation of various audiences and subject matter does not disambiguate authors.
+E.B. and T.H. are distinguishable as one wrote a children's book ("Chitty Chitty Bang Bang") and the other wrote James Bond novels.  Oh wait, that was Ian Fleming.  James Bond was the author of "Birds of the West Indies."  I think the explanation of various audiences and subject matter does not disambiguate authors.  See "Ambrose, Gardner and Doyle" by Raymond Smullyan.
 [[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 06:00, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:00, 15 June 2019
Line 40:		Line 40:
	I think this has to be viewed from one step back, i.e., it is not necessarily about books or writers, but rather a take on people who form and voice opinions without proper knowledge of the facts, even if the facts are very easily researchable.		I think this has to be viewed from one step back, i.e., it is not necessarily about books or writers, but rather a take on people who form and voice opinions without proper knowledge of the facts, even if the facts are very easily researchable.
	This happens A LOT in forum postings, e.g., when there is an article about some scientific dicovery on a popular news site, and then people start discussing (and fighting) about that discovery in the forums for this article. These discussions are more often than not based purely on speculation, without anyone bothering to check the original publication on which the article was based, or even without any specialist knowledge about the subject matter at hand. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.19\|162.158.89.19]] 09:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC)		This happens A LOT in forum postings, e.g., when there is an article about some scientific dicovery on a popular news site, and then people start discussing (and fighting) about that discovery in the forums for this article. These discussions are more often than not based purely on speculation, without anyone bothering to check the original publication on which the article was based, or even without any specialist knowledge about the subject matter at hand. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.19\|162.158.89.19]] 09:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
		+
		+	E.B. and T.H. are distinguishable as one wrote a children's book ("Chitty Chitty Bang Bang") and the other wrote James Bond novels. Oh wait, that was Ian Fleming. James Bond was the author of "Birds of the West Indies." I think the explanation of various audiences and subject matter does not disambiguate authors.
		+	[[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 06:00, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 ::Yes, it's unusally early. It happened before, but most of the time the new comics arrived in the late afternoon (central european time). This one was already up when I turned on my computer ~8am. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 11:54, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 Is there any value in adding info about the authors mentioned? [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 13:17, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
@@ Line 16: / Line 17: @@
 I don't think this relates to the "Fregoli Delusion"(sp) - they think the same person is using more than one name. [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])
 : Yeah, this feels more like pseudonyms than Frengoli to me.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.206.22|172.68.206.22]] 18:42, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 Shouldn't we discuss authors with multiple pseudonyms? Like JK Rowling and Robert Galbraith, or Nora Roberts and JD Robb, etc... [[Special:Contributions/172.68.143.144|172.68.143.144]] 16:44, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 Why would Megan pick those 4 authors to be the same person?  What do they or their works have in common?  It would be nice to cover that.  (Not knowing anything about any of them, any theory I might advance would be about as valid as one of Megan's.)
 Bit of a long-shot, but I wonder if the link has anything to do with Randall's book tour competition.  (He invites people to Write the best story using nothing but book covers.)[https://blog.xkcd.com/2019/06/10/book-tour-announcement/]  Any good story/sentence made up with works by those 4 authors? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.55|162.158.107.55]] 22:13, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 How about the theory that Mary Pearson, Andre Norton, Andrew North, Allen Weston, and M. D. Herter are the same person. ;-) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.144|162.158.106.144]] 22:31, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 ::Thanks :) I had to note this down somewhere to not forget it, when the though struck me, but didn't have time for a proper edit... --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 12:17, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 :::I got your back, Jack...er, Lupo! ;-) [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 12:42, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 I think this has to be viewed from one step back, i.e., it is not necessarily about books or writers, but rather a take on people who form and voice opinions without proper knowledge of the facts, even if the facts are very easily researchable.
 This happens A LOT in forum postings, e.g., when there is an article about some scientific dicovery on a popular news site, and then people start discussing (and fighting) about that discovery in the forums for this article. These discussions are more often than not based purely on speculation, without anyone bothering to check the original publication on which the article was based, or even without any specialist knowledge about the subject matter at hand. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.19|162.158.89.19]] 09:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 Should trivia link it to [[923: Strunk and White]] which also mentions E.B. white.? --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:32, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 : Done! [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 11:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 I think this has to be viewed from one step back, i.e., it is not necessarily about books or writers, but rather a take on people who form and voice opinions without proper knowledge of the facts, even if the facts are very easily researchable.
 This happens A LOT in forum postings, e.g., when there is an article about some scientific dicovery on a popular news site, and then people start discussing (and fighting) about that discovery in the forums for this article. These discussions are more often than not based purely on speculation, without anyone bothering to check the original publication on which the article was based, or even without any specialist knowledge about the subject matter at hand. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.19|162.158.89.19]] 09:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC)