This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Nineteen Eighty-Four 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, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 4 months |
Nineteen Eighty-Four was a Language and literature good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I have searched for this name and can't find it anywhere except this Wikipedia article and other references to the same exact quote. Is this a real source? 130.44.175.166 ( talk) 21:11, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm surprised about User:Drbogdan's addition of and external link to a YouTube clip which is much more than an "Updated Summary". It's a tendentious piece of pamphleteering, bordering on conspiracy theory, that uses the book as a hook for its ideas. Admittedly, there is a fair bit of summation in the clip, but it doesn't take 50 minutes to summarize the novel – it's in large part the personal musings of a crusader. I suggest to remove that clip from this article. -- Michael Bednarek ( talk) 14:12, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Kenixkil ( talk) 19:19, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
I think the description of the book on here and in popular culture isn't accurate and I can hopefully prove this with the book as my source. The government in the book isn't some all-powerful regime but instead a dying regime that became addicted to surveillance and repression of its own members to the point where the people who could've saved it were instead turned against it. The evidence for this is the description of chocolate and cigarettes which are both portrayed as being cheapened or reduced compared to previous times. A totalitarian government wouldn't be cutting the supplies of those 2 things unless it had to since chocolate and cigarettes are one of the few remaining creature comforts available to the working class. This means that the regime is failing. Another thing to keep in mind is that the repression was mainly targeted at party members and not the 'proles' who were generally left alone. This means that the intent of the book is not to warn the working class of the dangers of totalitarian governments but rather to tell people who would support totalitarianism that such a system will end up collapsing as it fails to function and ends up turning on the few honest people who could've saved it. The only thing the government was good at was catching disloyal government employees and it relied on this ability so much that it ended up getting rid of the people who could've saved it. I think people are misunderstanding the target audience. 2604:2D80:6305:600:587E:9E83:FCFC:9CC3 ( talk) 02:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Nineteen Eighty-Four 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, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 4 months |
Nineteen Eighty-Four was a Language and literature good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I have searched for this name and can't find it anywhere except this Wikipedia article and other references to the same exact quote. Is this a real source? 130.44.175.166 ( talk) 21:11, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm surprised about User:Drbogdan's addition of and external link to a YouTube clip which is much more than an "Updated Summary". It's a tendentious piece of pamphleteering, bordering on conspiracy theory, that uses the book as a hook for its ideas. Admittedly, there is a fair bit of summation in the clip, but it doesn't take 50 minutes to summarize the novel – it's in large part the personal musings of a crusader. I suggest to remove that clip from this article. -- Michael Bednarek ( talk) 14:12, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Kenixkil ( talk) 19:19, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
I think the description of the book on here and in popular culture isn't accurate and I can hopefully prove this with the book as my source. The government in the book isn't some all-powerful regime but instead a dying regime that became addicted to surveillance and repression of its own members to the point where the people who could've saved it were instead turned against it. The evidence for this is the description of chocolate and cigarettes which are both portrayed as being cheapened or reduced compared to previous times. A totalitarian government wouldn't be cutting the supplies of those 2 things unless it had to since chocolate and cigarettes are one of the few remaining creature comforts available to the working class. This means that the regime is failing. Another thing to keep in mind is that the repression was mainly targeted at party members and not the 'proles' who were generally left alone. This means that the intent of the book is not to warn the working class of the dangers of totalitarian governments but rather to tell people who would support totalitarianism that such a system will end up collapsing as it fails to function and ends up turning on the few honest people who could've saved it. The only thing the government was good at was catching disloyal government employees and it relied on this ability so much that it ended up getting rid of the people who could've saved it. I think people are misunderstanding the target audience. 2604:2D80:6305:600:587E:9E83:FCFC:9CC3 ( talk) 02:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)