This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Gene Roddenberry article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2 |
![]() | Gene Roddenberry has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Gene Roddenberry was copied or moved into Early life and career of Gene Roddenberry with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Is there a source for the description of Roddenberry in the intro as a philosopher and a futurist? Wikipedia's "Futurist" article describes futurists as scientists, social scientists, or people who have been consulted by private and public organizations about the future. As far as I know, Roddenberry has never been a consultant on anything other than the arts (specifically film and television). Also, though there are many philosophical ideas reflected in Star Trek episodes, Roddenberry was not, himself, known as a philosopher. He certainly had a philosophy, but so does everyone else, and while his ideas were progressive, none of them were new and original contributions to any philosophic study. His award from the AHA is an arts award rather than a pioneer award for a reason. I'm not even sure "populistic" is a word ("populist" is the adjectival form of "populism"). Unless a source is provided, I will edit this. 67.4.197.220 ( talk) 23:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: SilkTork ( talk · contribs) 08:40, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
I'll start reading over the next few days and then begin to make comments. I am normally a slow reviewer - if that is likely to be a problem, please let me know as soon as possible. I tend to directly do copy-editing and minor improvements as I'm reading the article rather than list them here; if there is a lot of copy-editing to be done I may suggest getting a copy-editor (on the basis that a fresh set of eyes is helpful). Anything more significant than minor improvements I will raise here. I see the reviewer's role as collaborative and collegiate, so I welcome discussion regarding interpretation of the criteria. SilkTork ✔Tea time
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
This is a readable and interesting (if a little long-winded) article on Gene Roddenberry. It is well written and meets most of the GA criteria. There are some quibbles and queries mentioned above, and two fails - the lead needs a rewrite to meet part of Criteria 1b - MoS: WP:Lead; and trimming of non-essential details and colouring to meet Criteria 3b - Focused. Review on hold to these issues to be addressed/discussed. SilkTork ✔Tea time 01:09, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Midnightblueowl ( talk · contribs) 18:56, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
I'll field this one, if I may. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 18:56, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
That's great Miyagawa. Thanks for your work on the article. I'm happy to pass this now, although would recommend giving it a Peer Review to focus on the prose before taking it to FAC. Best, Midnightblueowl ( talk) 11:55, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
How is it relevant for the article that he was quite intolerant against other people´s beliefs? I don´t see what that has to do with Star Trek or his other productions. 77.11.168.91 ( talk) 17:18, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Am I the only one who thinks this doesn't make any sense? Dlabtot ( talk) 18:53, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
In the legacy section, second paragraph list has:
I've not read this book (only just seen listings for it today). However, I have read Inside The Mind Of Gene Roddenberry by Yvonne Fern (and still have a copy). The description of The Last Conversation matches the content of Inside The Mind. Inside The Mind is listed on Amazon UK (as well as The Last Conversation). My paperback copy (bought in England) says "A Paperback Original 1995. (C)". From Amazon, The Last Conversation was 1994 hardback. I suspect one is a repackage of the other. Could be a edited versions, or revised etc. If someone knows exactly, could we say in the articul. Maybe at least note that the title Inside The Mind Of Gene Roddenberry exists.
Dannman ( talk) 15:28, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Its says that Roddenberry wrote an episode ("Coastal Security") for Harbormaster produced by Frederick Zif - but I don't see his name mentioned on wither the wiki page or imdb. I do see him mentioned as a writer from a single episode of Harbor Command, produced by Zif. This episode is called "The Psyciartist". Can anyone help clear this up?-- Bellerophon5685 ( talk) 00:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Gene Roddenberry article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2 |
![]() | Gene Roddenberry has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Gene Roddenberry was copied or moved into Early life and career of Gene Roddenberry with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Is there a source for the description of Roddenberry in the intro as a philosopher and a futurist? Wikipedia's "Futurist" article describes futurists as scientists, social scientists, or people who have been consulted by private and public organizations about the future. As far as I know, Roddenberry has never been a consultant on anything other than the arts (specifically film and television). Also, though there are many philosophical ideas reflected in Star Trek episodes, Roddenberry was not, himself, known as a philosopher. He certainly had a philosophy, but so does everyone else, and while his ideas were progressive, none of them were new and original contributions to any philosophic study. His award from the AHA is an arts award rather than a pioneer award for a reason. I'm not even sure "populistic" is a word ("populist" is the adjectival form of "populism"). Unless a source is provided, I will edit this. 67.4.197.220 ( talk) 23:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: SilkTork ( talk · contribs) 08:40, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
I'll start reading over the next few days and then begin to make comments. I am normally a slow reviewer - if that is likely to be a problem, please let me know as soon as possible. I tend to directly do copy-editing and minor improvements as I'm reading the article rather than list them here; if there is a lot of copy-editing to be done I may suggest getting a copy-editor (on the basis that a fresh set of eyes is helpful). Anything more significant than minor improvements I will raise here. I see the reviewer's role as collaborative and collegiate, so I welcome discussion regarding interpretation of the criteria. SilkTork ✔Tea time
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
This is a readable and interesting (if a little long-winded) article on Gene Roddenberry. It is well written and meets most of the GA criteria. There are some quibbles and queries mentioned above, and two fails - the lead needs a rewrite to meet part of Criteria 1b - MoS: WP:Lead; and trimming of non-essential details and colouring to meet Criteria 3b - Focused. Review on hold to these issues to be addressed/discussed. SilkTork ✔Tea time 01:09, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Midnightblueowl ( talk · contribs) 18:56, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
I'll field this one, if I may. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 18:56, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
That's great Miyagawa. Thanks for your work on the article. I'm happy to pass this now, although would recommend giving it a Peer Review to focus on the prose before taking it to FAC. Best, Midnightblueowl ( talk) 11:55, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
How is it relevant for the article that he was quite intolerant against other people´s beliefs? I don´t see what that has to do with Star Trek or his other productions. 77.11.168.91 ( talk) 17:18, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Am I the only one who thinks this doesn't make any sense? Dlabtot ( talk) 18:53, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
In the legacy section, second paragraph list has:
I've not read this book (only just seen listings for it today). However, I have read Inside The Mind Of Gene Roddenberry by Yvonne Fern (and still have a copy). The description of The Last Conversation matches the content of Inside The Mind. Inside The Mind is listed on Amazon UK (as well as The Last Conversation). My paperback copy (bought in England) says "A Paperback Original 1995. (C)". From Amazon, The Last Conversation was 1994 hardback. I suspect one is a repackage of the other. Could be a edited versions, or revised etc. If someone knows exactly, could we say in the articul. Maybe at least note that the title Inside The Mind Of Gene Roddenberry exists.
Dannman ( talk) 15:28, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Its says that Roddenberry wrote an episode ("Coastal Security") for Harbormaster produced by Frederick Zif - but I don't see his name mentioned on wither the wiki page or imdb. I do see him mentioned as a writer from a single episode of Harbor Command, produced by Zif. This episode is called "The Psyciartist". Can anyone help clear this up?-- Bellerophon5685 ( talk) 00:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)