Talk:Major science fiction authors

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page. Please feel free to add your name the project participation list and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
List	This article is a List.

[edit] Expanding this list

• This list is initially based on the Locus lists of best SF novelists and short story writers. Authors who have won more than one Hugo and/or Nebula awards should be added.

I have marked your article for deletion. Any article listing major Sci-Fi authors which fails to mention either Asimov or Heinlein has no right to exist, in my personal view. Incidentally, should the article survive, you have no right under wikipedia guidelines to stipulate who should/should not be added to it.--Anthony.bradbury 00:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Gimme a gosh-darn break and let me finish editing. Asimov is already there and Heinlein is going to be added. It happens that the books that make Heinlein notable are closer to the end of the alphabet. Notability criteria belong to consensus, which that statement is intended to reflect. Avt tor 00:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, it would also help this article to list two or three of the most famous works for each author. Avt tor 00:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Why are Martin and Gaiman on this list, but Verne, Lem, and others not writing in English missing? I think the idea of a list of truly major SF authors is really good (esp. since they have now been banned from the major entry), but crtieria and scope need to be worked out carefully. Kdammers 03:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree about Verne. The list and definition is just a first draft. IMO, it's not so much the criteria as the length of the list that's important. The list is useful as an introduction insofar as it is short. It is useful, which is why it didn't get deleted right away as a section of the main article. We need some way of including a handful of authors from before the Hugo award time frame. Avt tor 04:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Science Fiction Hall of Fame could be used for historical authors. Avt tor 09:32, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

If by historical you mean ~dead, then if we agree with this criterion, we needto eliminate some of the ones on here.

By "historical" I mean "not measurable by criteria currently available", i.e. awards, popular best-of lists, sources cited in article; in other words, authors published mainly before 1950 (around when the Hugo awards became well established). Avt tor 00:19, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How long should this be?

Can we set a rough number limit (say 10,25, or 50) and try to keep it pretty close to that? I think some of the people on here are not so major in SF as others not present. But we should have a basis for selection. That is, I'm not going to start editing just based on my views (but here are suggestremovals and replacements, any-way: David Brin, Lois McMaster Bujold, Neil Gaiman, Joe Haldeman, Lovecraft (fantasy), George R. R. Martin, Niven?, Andre Norton, Vernor Vinge; ->Ballard?, E. R. Burroughs, Campbell, Delaney, Huxley, Moorcock, Merrill or C. L. Moore, E. E. Smith (pulp quality but historically important)?, Stapledon, Strugatsky(1 or 2), Vonnegut!,Zamyatin Kdammers 08:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

IMO, this article becomes less useful at over 50 authors. We should agree on and define criteria, then apply those; if those criteria cause the list to grow out of control, the criteria should be narrowed. Reviewing your suggestions:

• Brin: 16th in Locus "Best All-Time Novel" poll, three Hugo awards, nine Hugo nominations.
• Bujold: 15th on Locus "Best All-Time Novella" poll, five Hugo awards, five Hugo nominations. Perhaps the best character author in the genre ever.
• Gaiman: three Hugo awards
• Haldeman: 12th in Locus "Best All-Time Novel" poll, five Hugo awards, three Hugo nomination
• Lovecraft
• Martin: "Sandkings" listed as 6th in Locus "Best All-Time Novellette" poll. Four Hugo awards, thirteen nominations. Certainly one of the best-selling authors in the field in the 21st century.
• Niven: listed as 6th in the Locus "Best All-Time Author" poll. His work influenced a generation of hard SF writers. Five Hugo awards and fourteen additional Hugo nominations. Probably contributed more to world-building that Hal Clement.
• Norton: Grand Master Award (6th ever). Science Fiction Hall of Fame. Two Hugo nominations.
• Vinge: Four Hugo awards, four nominations. Probably the most important hard SF author today, heir to the tradition of Niven and Cherryh.

• Ballard: 36th in the Locus "Best All-Time Short Fiction" author poll
• Burroughs: Science Fiction Hall of Fame. Died in 1950. One Hugo nomination (not sure how he got a nomination 14 years after his death).
• Campbell: Science Fiction Hall of Fame (notable pre-1950). I would argue that Campbell is more notable as an editor, not an author.
• Delaney: Science Fiction Hall of Fame (post-1950). #16 on Locus "Best All-Time Author" poll. One Hugo, seven nominations.
• Huxley: meets no listed criteria
• Moorcock: Science Fiction Hall of Fame
• Merrill: I'm not sure who this is, Merritt or Merril or ?
• Moore: Science Fiction Hall of Fame
• Smith: Science Fiction Hall of Fame
• Stapledon: meets no listed criteria
• Strugatsky: meets no listed criteria
• Vonnegut: Three Hugo nominations
• Zamyatin: meets no listed criteria

The only ambiguous cases here seem to be Lovecraft, Norton, Burroughs, and Delaney.

If you want to argue criteria, that's a different discussion. This page is still sort of a draft and the criteria themselves are just a preliminary suggestion. My perception of "major" was largely "most notable" and in my head that was mostly most award-winning. Hugo awards by themselves didn't quite capture all the most noteworthy authors, so I added the Locus polls and the Grand Master award. When it was pointed out that these left off a few historical figures like Verne and Wells, we added the Hall of Fame for the pre-1950 authors. I'd consider "best-selling" as a consideration but I don't have good data for that. I would be evaluating any additional criteria on the standard of "equivalent to multiple award-winning".

Avt tor 08:41, 27 February 2007 (UTC)