Talk:Douglas Adams/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 31 August 2002 and 20 November 2005.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

Please add new archivals to Talk:Douglas Adams/Archive02. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you. JohnDBuell 23:22, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Contents

Spoilers

I think it would be nice if someone had left my spoiler warning there, as the following passage concerning the deaths of characters spoiled Mostly Harmless for me, and I don't wish for it to happen to other individuals.

--Gitaroo Man 01:52, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Did not forsee

Removed the paragraph on how HHGG "foresaw" future scientific discoveries and inventions, as there was little factual content in it and a great deal of stretching. FWIW, Marvin was *not* named after Marvin Minsky but was, according to Adams, originally named "Marshall" after a friend of his, name later arbitrarily changed to "Marvin" to protect his friend's identity and/or sound less like a cowboy; the Earth being a giant computer has little to do with actual concepts of organic computing; and though the Guide itself does presage modern e-book devices it was not a particularly original idea at the time.

Starship Titanic

  • I sort of recall that DA even wrote a computer game, namely a text adventure titled Starship Titanic, in the 80s, and that this game was later reedited as graphics adventure. Has anybody details? Sanders muc 22:03, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
      • No, Douglas Adams was the author of the HHG text game by Infocom, and did a lot of the writing on the Starship Titanic game, a text adventure with pictures, more or less. --Ben Brockert 00:12, Jun 2, 2004 (UTC)
    • See Starship Titanic Ausir 22:10, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC).

Digital distrbution of HHGG novels?

  • I also remember that DA explicitly allowed for digital distribution of the hitchhiker novels back in the BBS times. Is this true? Sanders muc 22:03, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Update from Salmon

Would be nice if someone who actually has a copy of The Salmon Of Doubt would update this page with info on that. AW

Twelve fits?

What's a "twelve fit radio series"? Is it the same as a "twelve-part radio series"? --Heron

Aha. I just found the answer to my own question on the The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy page. --Heron

It's a nod to The Hunting of the Snark by Lewis Carroll. --Anorak

"Teatime", "Tea-time", "Tea-Time"?

Is it "Teatime", "Tea-time", "Tea-Time", or... yes, I know I'm terribly pedantic, but just humour me, okay? :o)

  • My copy says it's Tea-Time. --Anorak

Salmon of Doubt

Is it "A Salmon of Doubt" or "The Salmon of Doubt"? There seems to be some confusion over this issue.

  • My copy of the book agrees with the "The Salmon of Doubt" --Qaz
  • As does mine. -:)Ozzyslovechild 14:38, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Dr.Snuggles

Perhaps it should be mentioned that Douglas Adams also wrote scripts for Doctor Snuggles. I think there at least a two part story called "Dr Snuggles and the Nervous River" he wrote somewhere between 1978 and 1984. // Liftarn 14:21 Jan 15, 2003 (UTC)


it is "THE SALMON OF DOUBT"

"Hitch Hiker", "Hitch-Hiker" or "Hitchhiker"?

Note: Moved the following comment from article. Proposals belong on the talk page.

It's clear from the radio series (which started it all) and the Pan Original editions of the first two novelisations that "Hitchhiker" should probably be "Hitch Hiker" or "Hitch-Hiker"; this is also supported by the common abbreviations for the series, HHGG and h2g2.

It's just as clear that "Hitchhiker" is in common use, including evidence on old FAQs, snippets from DNA postings to his forum, and the alt.fan.douglas-adams Usenet group. And even original editions of the early work are inconsistent. Barring any definitive pronouncement from the late Mr Adams somewhere on the Internet, a compromise is proposed: follow the old IETF maxim: "be liberal about what we accept [e.g. in searches], but conservative about what we generate [in page edits]. Thus no attempt is made to choose what pages result in redirection and what pages don't, but the text in whatever the base pages are should attempt accuracy in original spelling, influenced by the use as originally released.

This issue is also skirted by using 'HHGG' as much as possible. :-)

Admittedly, this is an anal-retentive issue (remember the old joke: "Is 'anal retentive' hyphenated?"). But what would wikipedia be without occasional sorting through of anal-retentive issues?

I think we should use only one form for the sake of consistency. A Google search shows "Hitchhiker" is four times as common as "Hitch Hiker" and "Hitch-Hiker" combined:
"hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy" - 48,400
"hitch hiker's guide to the galaxy" - 12,400 (this catches the hyphenated version too)
Besides, Hitchhiker has also been the Wikipedia standard before you started to change it. You would have a lot more changing to do if you wanted to establish the other spelling consistently. --Wik 03:36, Dec 4, 2003 (UTC)

From The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:

Note: Unfortunately, the different editions of the Hitchhiker's Guide spell it differently -- so you'll find "Hitch-Hiker's Guide", "Hitch Hiker's Guide" as well as "Hitchhiker's Guide" in different editions (US or UK), versions (audio or text) and compilations of the book. For the sake of coherence Wikipedia spells it Hitchhiker, which is reportedly the way Adams himself preferred it. [1]
--Spikey 00:33, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Zark Off

Did the well-known HHGTTG imperative have any inspiration from the movie guy Samuel Z. Arkoff? 142.177.20.150 21:42, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I never heard "zark off" in H2G2, do you mean "Holy Zarquon"? As in "Holy Zarquon's singing fish!". -Wikibob | Talk 23:02, 2004 Aug 10 (UTC)
I clearly remember the term "Zark off." It may have not been in the first book, but it was in the series. Zaphod said it to Trillian. — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:15, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure it was in the beggining of Mostly Harmless. --User:24.95.67.19
"He said to meet him at his ship," said Arthur.

"What in the name of zarking fardwarks is the  old  fool  doing?"
exploded Ford.

"Meeting us at his ship in two minutes," said Arthur with a shrug
which  indicated  total  abdication  of thought.

--LTUAE, chapter 4.

"It is my pleasure to open for you ..."

"Zark off."

"... and my satisfaction to close again with the knowledge  of  a
job well done."

"I said zark off."

"Thank you for listening to this message."

Stomp stomp stomp stomp.

--LTUAE, chapter 11.

She carried it through to him and asked if he felt  like  talking
things through.

"Zark off," said Zaphod.

Trillian nodded patiently to herself, counted to an  even  higher
number,  tossed  the  tray lightly aside, walked to the transport
room and just teleported herself the hell out of his life.

--LTUAE, chapter 11.

Twice again in chapter 18 and chapter 22, once in chapter 25, once in chapter 31, also in YZPIS and MH. --Ben Brockert 17:50, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)

An all-purpose expletive coined by the late Douglas Noel Adams for his internationally bestselling science fiction novel "A Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy."

I think it should be included in the main article. Fatalis 22:58, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nationality category?

Why is Adams listed under Category:American writers and Category:California writers? Writers are typically listed under their own nationality/region, even if they did live somewhere else. Jihg 11:17, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

At what point does one become an American or Californian writer? How many years do you have to live there, or how much do you have to write? —Ben Brockert (42) UE News 18:16, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)
Maybe if he'd lived in America/California for a long time, or if his work was somehow American/Californian in spirit. But he only moved there in 1999, and his work, if anything, is British in spirit. Given that Charlie Chaplin and Alfred Hitchcock are placed in British but not American categories, how can we call Adams an American writer? Jihg 16:26, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)

On a related subject, I see the removal of some redundant categories has been revoked. Why? We don't need Category:Humorists if we already have Category:English humorists. Its recommended policy to use the most specific categories available, and not (usually) to place in both child and parent categories. What does "until the categories are sorted out" mean? Jihg 02:44, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

The tree structure of the categories is not very good. I'll poke around, then remove or revert my edit. —Ben Brockert (42) UE News 03:43, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

Douglas Adams was not an American, or Californian, writer. His work was recognisably, indeed quintessentially English. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:16, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Excellent point. —Ben Brockert (42) UE News 01:45, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

Premature death

I know this might sound dumb to most people, but isn't the phrase "premature death" POV'ed? I mean, who is to say it was premature? I just looks like fan-love to me. It's not important, I just felt like mentioning it. T2X 11:58, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

There are some fairly well established medical and actuarial definitions of premature death, so if anyone is going to seriously challenge this we could use such methods to determine whether the word premature could be used. I won't bother unless I see a serious challenge because I think most readers would agree that the death of a man by natural causes at age 49 is premature. Adams did not expect it; he had a young daughter and had just moved to Santa Barbara. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:14, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Another Article stolen...

http://www.famous.tc/Douglas_Adams.html <----It looks the same to me. Isn't that illegal? --Radiodj19 00:37, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Interesting to note that they're not keeping up with our edits here :) --JohnDBuell | Talk 02:23, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

DNA was a Doctor Who Script Editor

Douglas Adams was a script editor on Doctor Who (according to the page refered to above, for the 17th season, in 1979). He should be added to the category of Doctor Who Script Editors.

Photo

So is there a policy regarding the primary photo on an article? A process for selection, laid out etc.? It doesn't seem to be a Facilitated Discussion, but perhaps could be? Also, what is the policy on animated GIFs? I've bumped into a ton of articles that maybe shouldn't be allowed to be represented visually, above the fold, by just the one picture that was currently representing them there. Are there licensing issues that are being given their rightful due? Seem to recall that GIFs & prolly therefore animated GIFs had some poison pills on those fronts, but that was mostly a purist flow (righteous in its way, but not to be given too much due).

Is there a mandate from the herd on the topic?

In other words: Is it permitted on Wikipedia to post an animated gif that has a couple different photographical representations of something, or is it forbidden to do so?

-:)Ozzyslovechild 01:57, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

So many points, so little time. You may read about the GIF patent kerfuffle elsewhere. GIF#Unisys and LZW patent enforcement. Long story short, software that creates GIFs requires a paid license until the patent expires. Those who are paid-license-phobic (i.e. all open source developers) concluded that there shouldn't be any more GIFs.
As for animation, it's an odd choice for an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is supposed to be portable to offline reading as well, and there's no simple way to print out an animation. There's also the difficult issue of properly attributing all of constituent photos.
As for GIF, GIF is a very bad choice for photographs for its limited color palette and run-length coding. JPEG was specifically designed to photographs. JPEG typically produces smaller files for a photograph of the same dimensions, and the resulting quality can be higher for very colorful images. JPEG is going through its own patent mess right now, but that's another story entirely.
-- Ventura 22:50, 2005 May 7 (UTC)
I know the GIF long story. I curtailed, but referenced via 'poison pills' bit.
Animation would indeed be an odd choice for a traditional encyclopedia, but we're not.
A wonder that comes to mind is, 'is there a way for animated GIFs to degrade gracefully?' (so that printed or other more static incarnations of Wikipedia might not be hindered too much by such an addition to the mix.) Don't they default to just showing the first frame if animation is disabled?
re: GIFs being poor for photos: I'm most definitely with you there, but there ain't animated JPEGs, and on-balance GIFs aren't that bad, and where they're lousy (at least on on-screen resolution fronts) they're poor more-so on the file-size front and not the quality-of-visual-representation front (and since the actual impact of file size issues isn't grave, it might be deemed acceptable).
But the question still stands: Is there a policy on the usage of animaged GIFs? I couldn't find one. I'm hoping the next person that posts to this discussion page topic links to the place where it's laid out cold. Could be.
-:)Ozzyslovechild 05:09, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
There is an animated JPEG, but it's used as a movie format, rather than an animation format. MNG (animated PNG) would be the optimal solution for this problem, but it's not widely supported. For the semi-official stance, have you gone through the Manual of Style? WP:MOS. —Ben Brockert (42) UE News 04:52, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

Contents of The Salmon of Doubt

The article indicates that there are introductions/eulogies by Stephen Fry (check, UK edition only), Richard Dawkins (check again, UK and US editions), and Terry Gilliam?! Last I looked, and I didn't buy a copy of the paperback, as I own the UK and audiobook editions, it was Terry JONES who added an introduction to the paperback edition. Can someone who owns the paperback edition confirm this please? --JohnDBuell | Talk 05:13, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I own the paperback (UK), and the foreword is indeed by Stephen Fry. The prologue is by Nicholas Wroe and the epilogue is by Richard Dawkins, both articles published in The Guardian before the book. I can't find a mention of Terry Jones or Terry Gilliam at either end of the book, and am now confused. --195.92.67.208 1 July 2005 18:27 (UTC)
Christopher Cerf wrote the US Edition (hardcover only?) foreword, and reads it on the CD. Terry Jones IS listed (thanks amazon.com!) as having written the introduction to the US Edition PAPERBACK.... (to confirm: search for this edition on amazon.com and use their 'search within the book' functionality). But Terry Gilliam? I think this is a screw-up. --JohnDBuell | Talk 8 July 2005 03:13 (UTC)

The Radical Atheist

Why is there no mention of Douglas Adams' describing himself as a "Radical Atheist"? I think that is quite an important point in his biography. This interview (which can also be found in "The Salmon of Doubt") should also be linked: http://www.americanatheist.org/win98-99/T2/silverman.html User:Quasimondo

If you want to do a whole paragraph or two about how he started as a devout Christian, participated in religious services in Brentwood, but with the logic classes they taught, Adams started questioning his beliefs, and evolved into being an agnostic first and then a self described "radical atheist" go right ahead! --JohnDBuell | Talk 23:40, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hitchhiker (the M. J. Simpson biography)

Again, verification needed. My US edition of the book has a foreword by Neil Gaiman, and the article here states there's a foreword by John Lloyd. Is that the UK edition only? --JohnDBuell | Talk 20:27, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Infobox?

Is there a reason NOT to use Infobox_biography anymore? --JohnDBuell | Talk 18:55, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There was never a reason to use it. It is nonstandard and uselessly repetitive. You know, the name and birth and death dates of the person are given right at the beginning of the article, just a bit to the left of the infobox. Such a box makes sense only for people in certain categories, like U.S. presidents, with many standardized data fields appropriate for that category (in that case term of office, name of first lady, predecessor, successor, etc.), but if it's just name and birth and death info and some random fact (like "fifteen million books sold"), an infobox is pointless. NoPuzzleStranger 13:11, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
If you're going to remove it, at least re-introduce a caption, per the Manual of Style. Wikipedia:Manual of Style or Wikipedia:Captions --JohnDBuell | Talk 13:54, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This template is now up for deletion. Jooler 17:01, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
An anon user restored the infobox, claming that there's no consensus on TfD. But regardless of that, THIS page now does better without the infobox - I am able to include a footnote to the photographer who took the photo of DNA that we use for this article by having a regular image box, and I can NOT do this using the Infobox template. I vote that it should STAY GONE (from THIS article). --JohnDBuell | Talk 21:11, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Footlights

I changed 'Footlights Revue' (dead) link this to point at Footlights but I'm not sure now, maybe revue would be better as footlights has a mention already. Any opinions?Alf 29 June 2005 16:55 (UTC)

Noel or Noël?

Was his middle name with or without diaeresis? I have only seen the diaeresis on wikipedia, so I have my doubts. --Palnatoke 10:26, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Both M.J. Simpson and Nick Webb, in their biographies Hitchhiker and Wish You Were Here respectively, use "Noël" so I'd stick with it! --JohnDBuell | Talk 11:59, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
By the way, just had an opportunity to check the full online Britannica, and they use "in full Douglas Noël Adams Douglas Adams " --JohnDBuell | Talk 19:33, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Fixing up the biography

We could really REALLY use sections on his school days (such as the letter and short story published in "The Eagle") and his Adams/Smith/Adams and Footlights days in Cambridge. The bio is skipping from birth, to barely mentioning Brentwood and Cambridge, right into working with Graham Chapman and selling the occasional sketch/joke to the BBC. --JohnDBuell | Talk 07:26, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

I've filled in some more details for family members and early life/career (except I forgot the contributions to "The Eagle" myself, argh!). Probably the only other thing that SHOULD be mentioned (IMO) is his l-o-n-g courtship (10 years, I think?) to Jane Belson, their marriage, and daughter Polly. Are there any other suggestions? --JohnDBuell | Talk 03:04, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
FINALLY got around to parts of this. Added quite a bit on his years at Brentwood. Haven't touched the personal/family life (1980s/90s) yet. --JohnDBuell | Talk 13:12, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Usenet

Do we really need the section on Douglas' interactions on USENET? I'm sure its fun for the people who posted there, but it doesn't add anything to our knowledge of Adams, does it? DJ Clayworth 17:47, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Move to Wikiquote. --Bonalaw 20:27, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
I think it should be tightened up to say that Douglas DID respond to his fans, first through postal mail, then through other technologies, since Douglas himself embraced many of them. He DID reply on USENET, and through e-mail, and at the end of his life on a forum hosted on douglasadams.com. --JohnDBuell | Talk 11:31, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

New Sections?

Going with my earlier suggestion, if we clip the a.f.d-a section but move a reference to a "Adams's responses to his fans" section higher in the article, and include the references to mail, e-mail, USENET and his forums, how about we also add the section about his own family (wife and daughter) and also add a section about his love of science and technology? --JohnDBuell | Talk 03:08, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Done. Finally. Added a general technology sub-section to the section on Adams's beliefs, though it is large enough that it could be pulled out to stand alone. --JohnDBuell 21:35, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Question for those who primarily constructed this article.

I was thinking the other day about Douglas Adams (as I often do; him being a large influence in my life), and I thought that it might be a good idea to reconstruct this article, with all the same information, only in Adams's style of writing. This would probably be difficult, and require a lot of collaboration between multiple individuals who contributed most of the information to begin with.

It's just an idea now, but I think doing such could really add a special touch to the article.

Thoughts?

email me, if any of you want to attempt this..

fentgphx@gmail.com

While that might seem like a good idea, I have a feeling that would get "shot down" as "not being encyclopedic." --JohnDBuell | Talk 02:27, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Oh please no. I think if anyone were to try this, it might become necessary to kill them. --Bonalaw 07:49, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Cover images wanted!

If anyone has UK first editions of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and/or Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency, could you please scan and add them under {{bookcover}}? Blah, I never signed this. Oops. --JohnDBuell | Talk 02:24, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Such cover images are, in my opinion, the only things that are really still "missing" from this article. I feel it is FINALLY complete, and covers the major themes and works in Adams's life. --JohnDBuell 21:35, 20 November 2005 (UTC)