Emmanuel Carrère's book is a novel whose protagonist is Philip K. Dick, but it is not a biography. Many episodes in it are totally and deliberately fictional. I don't think it should be kept in the Biography section, though it should be mentioned in the entry (maybe in the main PKD entry).-- 213.140.21.227 ( talk) 20:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
I would like to discuss the appropriate bibliographic format for this page, if one exists. — Viriditas | Talk 05:30, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm the person responsible for re-ordering the novels by the date of their composition, which I think is crucial to understanding his career. In fact, the research for this chronology was done by Paul Williams, and although I'm sure Paul would have done it without my urging, I'd like to think that my encouraging him (back when I was database manager for the Philip K. Dick Society) helped in some small way.
The most useful format for the short stories is more problematical. They, too, might be re-arranged by date of composition (since they were eventually grouped that way by paul when he edited The Collected Stories. Emvan 10:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to add some more bibliographic detail, along the lines of the Bibliography of John W. Campbell. Any comments or objections? It will be at least a couple of weeks till I can get to it, so I thought I'd post a note here first since the format has already been discussed.
Separately, I'd suggest that if I do that, the main bibliography should be in publication order of first edition, which is a fairly standard bibliographic convention. The composition order is clearly valuable, though, so how about appending it to the bibliography in a more compressed form, perhaps tabular? Mike Christie 20:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Composition order isn't arbitrary enough, I think we should order them by the date that he thought of the idea for the story. 141.150.241.123 17:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Can we also categorise them by which substances he was under the influence of, or some other indication of his state of mind? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
217.33.154.66 (
talk) 10:25, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
"Voices From the Street (forthcoming 2006)" - Can someone tell me who will be publishing this book? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.132.226.246 ( talk • contribs)
Image:The Crack in Space.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 06:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I have no objection to an appropriate lede, a short one of about a paragraph or so, focused on Dick's written output. That would certainly be an asset to this article. But a long general essay on Dick, unreferenced and duplicative of the main article is not what's called for. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 07:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
The bibliography survived for quite a long time without a lede, but I agree that it's appropriate to have one. If you've got something better than what I provided, why not post it? Or re-shape what I've got there into something better. It doesn't seem like the best action to simply delete it. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 07:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
(out)That's not exactly accurate. I deleted it and left the article as it was, without a lede, exactly as it has been for two years. I thought it was perfectly functional that way, since we have a primary article that covers the general subject of Philip K. Dick. The proposed lede was not appropriate because it was a moderately long general essay on Dick and his life (it can be found here, and not a brief introduction to the bibliography focusing on Dick's writing. Since you seemed convinced that the article needed a lede, I posted one, admitedly filched from the lede of the general article, but edited down to focus on the writing, which, after all, is the subject of the bibliography (that lede can be found here). My suggestion is to either leave it in place to see if it flies, or replace it with something better that's about the same size and serves the same purpose. I certainly don't have any great attachment to it, per se, nor do I see a profound need for a lede at all, given the nature of the list. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 08:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I looked at this article, and said, yes, that lead is a little long. The lead in a bibliography article doesn't really need any biographical information; all that should go to the main article. I think the intro that Bibliography of Nathanael West has is completely sufficient. Then I looked at the history and realized that I wasn't looking at the extended lead that was under contention here, which is seriously unneeded in this article. That lead should die, die, die.-- Prosfilaes ( talk) 14:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
(out)Sorry. I disagree about expanding the lede. It's not an essay about Philip Dick and everything that relates to his publishing, it's simply a brief introduction to the article, which is a bibliography, a list. The stuff you're talking about should go into the main article, if it's not already there. I think what you have is quite good at the moment, and don't see much need for expansion. Just MHO. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 17:13, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I think, though, that a bibliography is something somewhat different, it's essentially a list of works, as per definition #2 here. It's because I see this article as a list that I've been resistant to the need to expand the lede, which I see as basically a little intro to the list. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 17:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
While you are busy trying to support your claims with evidence, I'll be rewriting this entire lead section, so you may not see a reply from me for a few hours. I look forward to seeing you support your claims about edits made by User:Roogroog, as you have accused this editor of plagiarizing material and inserting POV without any evidence. I would hope that when you smear editors, you actually would have the decency to support your accusations with evidence. Please do so while I compose the new lead section. I'll look for your reply when I'm done updating this article. Viriditas ( talk) 10:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Never, at any time, did I accuse that red-link of plagiarism. And I assume good faith until the user forfeits that assumption through his behavior. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
it says 36 novels, but lists 48. change to 48? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.84.69 ( talk) 00:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
The Titans cover image does not meet Wikipedia's Fair Use guidelines for copyrighted book covers. The article would need to contian specific discussion about Titan. If someone has a cover of any of the titles that are actually discussed in hte article, those can be used under WP:FU. -- The Red Pen of Doom 22:32, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I remember watching as a kid a movie about a computer-controlled house. A guy lived in the house, and I think he was a computer programmer. When I fell in love with some girl, the house got jealous. The computer graphics were all ancient white-on-black 80's style. I would love to track this movie down, and it should be tracked down as it is missing in the movies section. I remember distinctly that the ending credited androids/sheep because it was the first time I had ever seen the question posed and it struck me as a great question! - Ayeroxor ( talk) 01:33, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
I do believe it is Electric Dreams. Thanks to all! - Ayeroxor ( talk) 11:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
I think there should be more references explaining the nature of the edits for the books. Currently, several novels are marked with a "+", but there is no further information (even in the links for the specific novels, such as 'Vulcan's Hammer'). It seems like this information should be (1) better explained and (2) referenced, so that a curious party could find more information if they wanted. ThatGuamGuy ( talk) 05:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)sean
Since the correspondences between the various editions of the short story collection are far from obvious (e.g., both the Gollancz and the Citadel Twilight have a volume with the title "Second Variety", but the stories in each are completely different), I added a table that summarizes the correspondences and the more important changes (The order of the stories seems also to have changed in some volumes; these changes were omitted). I hope I added at the correct place; if it should be anywhere else, please tell me, or feel free to move it... David Mihola ( talk) 14:13, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
What about the story collections published by Orion Publishing Group? They should be added to the table.
Does the 5-volume series contain every short story he wrote? brain ( talk) 05:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
I have one volume at hand because I was going to use it for a KSMO reference citation. The information doesn't match what is in the list here. I haven't checked the others yet.
The Selected Letters of Philip K. Dick, 1938-1971. Grass Valley, California : Underwood Books, 1996 (Trade Edition) ISBN 1-887424-20-2 is the info from my physical copy. It also states ISBN 1-887424-21-0 is Slipcased Edition. 1996 is copyright date not printing date; perhaps that is the source of the date difference. Does anyone know the source for the information in the article here or why there might be discrepanies? My copy does refer to:
I can't see any good reason to cite differently than the info in the copy or copies I'm using but don't know whether to make changes in the article listings. Refrigerator Heaven ( talk) 10:55, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
On the official Philip K. Dick site, The Name of the Game is Death is listed unter Non-fiction essays, so I removed it from the short story list here.
I could not find any information on the alleged short story 11-17-80. It is not listed in the short story section of the offical website. So I marked it with citation needed. -- Darkday ( talk) 20:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
I intend to edit the Speculative fiction author navigational box for Philip K. Dick so the novels appear in order of publication with publication dates rather than composition order and dates there. That's how the other sections are ordered and what I believe the casual reader assumes a date refers to. I thought it wise to give a heads up here where interested editors are likely to see the heads up before beginning what may be a temporarily confusing process with potential appearance of vandalism. Please make any comments or objections at Template talk:Philip K. Dick. Refrigerator Heaven ( talk) 02:51, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi all. Where's the information coming from? In particular I'm wondering where the dates of composition came from.
Cheers MotleyPhule 03:42, 5 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MotleyPhule ( talk • contribs)
Hi there. I realized that this essay is not listed on his bibliography and although it is listed as an external link, i felt like it should be posted somewhere in the actual article, maybe even linked to "I hope I Shall Arrive Soon". Hemlock850 07:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemlock850 ( talk • contribs)
I don't really know how to edit it, but the current wikisource link points to "Philip K. Dick" --- this fails, because wikisource uses his full name, "Philip Kindred Dick". Could someone better skilled than me sort that out, maybe? Idontcareanymore ( talk) 18:01, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
Emmanuel Carrère's book is a novel whose protagonist is Philip K. Dick, but it is not a biography. Many episodes in it are totally and deliberately fictional. I don't think it should be kept in the Biography section, though it should be mentioned in the entry (maybe in the main PKD entry).-- 213.140.21.227 ( talk) 20:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
I would like to discuss the appropriate bibliographic format for this page, if one exists. — Viriditas | Talk 05:30, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm the person responsible for re-ordering the novels by the date of their composition, which I think is crucial to understanding his career. In fact, the research for this chronology was done by Paul Williams, and although I'm sure Paul would have done it without my urging, I'd like to think that my encouraging him (back when I was database manager for the Philip K. Dick Society) helped in some small way.
The most useful format for the short stories is more problematical. They, too, might be re-arranged by date of composition (since they were eventually grouped that way by paul when he edited The Collected Stories. Emvan 10:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to add some more bibliographic detail, along the lines of the Bibliography of John W. Campbell. Any comments or objections? It will be at least a couple of weeks till I can get to it, so I thought I'd post a note here first since the format has already been discussed.
Separately, I'd suggest that if I do that, the main bibliography should be in publication order of first edition, which is a fairly standard bibliographic convention. The composition order is clearly valuable, though, so how about appending it to the bibliography in a more compressed form, perhaps tabular? Mike Christie 20:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Composition order isn't arbitrary enough, I think we should order them by the date that he thought of the idea for the story. 141.150.241.123 17:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Can we also categorise them by which substances he was under the influence of, or some other indication of his state of mind? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
217.33.154.66 (
talk) 10:25, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
"Voices From the Street (forthcoming 2006)" - Can someone tell me who will be publishing this book? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.132.226.246 ( talk • contribs)
Image:The Crack in Space.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 06:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I have no objection to an appropriate lede, a short one of about a paragraph or so, focused on Dick's written output. That would certainly be an asset to this article. But a long general essay on Dick, unreferenced and duplicative of the main article is not what's called for. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 07:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
The bibliography survived for quite a long time without a lede, but I agree that it's appropriate to have one. If you've got something better than what I provided, why not post it? Or re-shape what I've got there into something better. It doesn't seem like the best action to simply delete it. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 07:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
(out)That's not exactly accurate. I deleted it and left the article as it was, without a lede, exactly as it has been for two years. I thought it was perfectly functional that way, since we have a primary article that covers the general subject of Philip K. Dick. The proposed lede was not appropriate because it was a moderately long general essay on Dick and his life (it can be found here, and not a brief introduction to the bibliography focusing on Dick's writing. Since you seemed convinced that the article needed a lede, I posted one, admitedly filched from the lede of the general article, but edited down to focus on the writing, which, after all, is the subject of the bibliography (that lede can be found here). My suggestion is to either leave it in place to see if it flies, or replace it with something better that's about the same size and serves the same purpose. I certainly don't have any great attachment to it, per se, nor do I see a profound need for a lede at all, given the nature of the list. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 08:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I looked at this article, and said, yes, that lead is a little long. The lead in a bibliography article doesn't really need any biographical information; all that should go to the main article. I think the intro that Bibliography of Nathanael West has is completely sufficient. Then I looked at the history and realized that I wasn't looking at the extended lead that was under contention here, which is seriously unneeded in this article. That lead should die, die, die.-- Prosfilaes ( talk) 14:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
(out)Sorry. I disagree about expanding the lede. It's not an essay about Philip Dick and everything that relates to his publishing, it's simply a brief introduction to the article, which is a bibliography, a list. The stuff you're talking about should go into the main article, if it's not already there. I think what you have is quite good at the moment, and don't see much need for expansion. Just MHO. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 17:13, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I think, though, that a bibliography is something somewhat different, it's essentially a list of works, as per definition #2 here. It's because I see this article as a list that I've been resistant to the need to expand the lede, which I see as basically a little intro to the list. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 17:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
While you are busy trying to support your claims with evidence, I'll be rewriting this entire lead section, so you may not see a reply from me for a few hours. I look forward to seeing you support your claims about edits made by User:Roogroog, as you have accused this editor of plagiarizing material and inserting POV without any evidence. I would hope that when you smear editors, you actually would have the decency to support your accusations with evidence. Please do so while I compose the new lead section. I'll look for your reply when I'm done updating this article. Viriditas ( talk) 10:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Never, at any time, did I accuse that red-link of plagiarism. And I assume good faith until the user forfeits that assumption through his behavior. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
it says 36 novels, but lists 48. change to 48? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.84.69 ( talk) 00:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
The Titans cover image does not meet Wikipedia's Fair Use guidelines for copyrighted book covers. The article would need to contian specific discussion about Titan. If someone has a cover of any of the titles that are actually discussed in hte article, those can be used under WP:FU. -- The Red Pen of Doom 22:32, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I remember watching as a kid a movie about a computer-controlled house. A guy lived in the house, and I think he was a computer programmer. When I fell in love with some girl, the house got jealous. The computer graphics were all ancient white-on-black 80's style. I would love to track this movie down, and it should be tracked down as it is missing in the movies section. I remember distinctly that the ending credited androids/sheep because it was the first time I had ever seen the question posed and it struck me as a great question! - Ayeroxor ( talk) 01:33, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
I do believe it is Electric Dreams. Thanks to all! - Ayeroxor ( talk) 11:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
I think there should be more references explaining the nature of the edits for the books. Currently, several novels are marked with a "+", but there is no further information (even in the links for the specific novels, such as 'Vulcan's Hammer'). It seems like this information should be (1) better explained and (2) referenced, so that a curious party could find more information if they wanted. ThatGuamGuy ( talk) 05:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)sean
Since the correspondences between the various editions of the short story collection are far from obvious (e.g., both the Gollancz and the Citadel Twilight have a volume with the title "Second Variety", but the stories in each are completely different), I added a table that summarizes the correspondences and the more important changes (The order of the stories seems also to have changed in some volumes; these changes were omitted). I hope I added at the correct place; if it should be anywhere else, please tell me, or feel free to move it... David Mihola ( talk) 14:13, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
What about the story collections published by Orion Publishing Group? They should be added to the table.
Does the 5-volume series contain every short story he wrote? brain ( talk) 05:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
I have one volume at hand because I was going to use it for a KSMO reference citation. The information doesn't match what is in the list here. I haven't checked the others yet.
The Selected Letters of Philip K. Dick, 1938-1971. Grass Valley, California : Underwood Books, 1996 (Trade Edition) ISBN 1-887424-20-2 is the info from my physical copy. It also states ISBN 1-887424-21-0 is Slipcased Edition. 1996 is copyright date not printing date; perhaps that is the source of the date difference. Does anyone know the source for the information in the article here or why there might be discrepanies? My copy does refer to:
I can't see any good reason to cite differently than the info in the copy or copies I'm using but don't know whether to make changes in the article listings. Refrigerator Heaven ( talk) 10:55, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
On the official Philip K. Dick site, The Name of the Game is Death is listed unter Non-fiction essays, so I removed it from the short story list here.
I could not find any information on the alleged short story 11-17-80. It is not listed in the short story section of the offical website. So I marked it with citation needed. -- Darkday ( talk) 20:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
I intend to edit the Speculative fiction author navigational box for Philip K. Dick so the novels appear in order of publication with publication dates rather than composition order and dates there. That's how the other sections are ordered and what I believe the casual reader assumes a date refers to. I thought it wise to give a heads up here where interested editors are likely to see the heads up before beginning what may be a temporarily confusing process with potential appearance of vandalism. Please make any comments or objections at Template talk:Philip K. Dick. Refrigerator Heaven ( talk) 02:51, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi all. Where's the information coming from? In particular I'm wondering where the dates of composition came from.
Cheers MotleyPhule 03:42, 5 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MotleyPhule ( talk • contribs)
Hi there. I realized that this essay is not listed on his bibliography and although it is listed as an external link, i felt like it should be posted somewhere in the actual article, maybe even linked to "I hope I Shall Arrive Soon". Hemlock850 07:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemlock850 ( talk • contribs)
I don't really know how to edit it, but the current wikisource link points to "Philip K. Dick" --- this fails, because wikisource uses his full name, "Philip Kindred Dick". Could someone better skilled than me sort that out, maybe? Idontcareanymore ( talk) 18:01, 8 March 2013 (UTC)