Talk:Earth (novel)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Literature Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Science fiction task force. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents 1 Recap of a failed VfD 2 Spoiler warning 3 List of predictions 4 Fair use rationale for Image:Earth(1stEd).jpg

[edit] Recap of a failed VfD

from VfD:

Delete this paragraph of nonsense. AlainV 03:53, 2004 May 20 (UTC)

• Delete. Reads like someone's sandbox noodlings. Alcarillo 05:10, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
• I tried to put this up for speedy deletion as nonsense, but it got reverted. Oh, well. I was confident it would show up here eventually. I still say delete. - Lucky 6.9 05:35, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
• I think he's talking about the David Brin novel. On that basis, I added an introductory line. MK 05:53, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
• Keep if this can be sorted out. Brin's novel is real. I am not sure how relevant is the original text since it has been a while since I read the novel. Andris 15:28, May 20, 2004 (UTC)
• Brin's novel did involve a black hole as a major plot point which is why I assumed it was the book the original poster was referring to. MK 16:29, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
• I've replaced the speculation/commentary with a summary of the book, as best I can given that I don't have it and haven't read it. Niteowlneils 18:14, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
  • I've read it, although not recently, and I added some more details. MK 05:42, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, the present version is a fairly good summary of the novel. ping 06:41, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, now a good summary. -- till we ☼☽ | Talk 22:15, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, looks fine now. RossA 02:54, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

'end moved discussion

[edit] Spoiler warning

Why was a spoiler warning added? There's no plot outcomes revealed in the article. MK2 06:03, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

: It's been removed. —Seqsea (talk) 04:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of predictions

That list of "predictions" could probably be cleaned up - If one didn't know better, it makes it sound like Brin was the first person ever to predict the Internet (c'mon, we all know Al Gore invented it way before this book was written!) - but seriously, pretty much anything by William Gibson has him beat (and he may not have been the first, either). Also - Global warming sea rise?!? Give me a break, it was an established scientific theory for years before this novel was written! And what the heck is a "lawyer program"? -- Antepenultimate 22:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Pity that this would be OR, but from my reading, no one predicted it as accurately as he did: Hypertext, multi-media, news feeds, email spam. Back in 1990, all we basically had was text; there was no MIME format, no HTML, and first hint of SPAM probably came with AOL in '92. Gibson, to wit, has stated (so I heard) that he never used a computer until long after he wrote Neuromancer. And from a technological standpoint, the only thing Gibson had right was a vague notion of internet security meta-techniques (ie, firewalls, though he imagined them much more iconically than we do today). I used to read quite a lot of 'classic' sci-fi, and Brin, despite the fact that he is not considered a cyberphunk author, and that most of the rest of his novels suck, was the most accurate so far. (But it would be nice if Neal Stephenson's the Diamond Age ever comes close to reality.) --Otheus 15:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Earth(1stEd).jpg

Image:Earth(1stEd).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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)