Talk:Transhumanism in fiction

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2019 and 20 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JayTheDaniels.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Split Video game part from 'other media'

I think that since video games takes up a large portion of 'other media', it should be split. Video games is more than large enough to stand on its own. Ran4 (talk) 18:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Half Life 2

I edited this out:

In the video game Half-Life 2, the player's primary enemies are transhumans created by an alien race known as the Combine. The human antagonist and puppet ruler of Earth, Dr. Breen, argues that the transhuman state is necessary and can only be achieved with outside (alien) help.

I've played through the game at least 5 times and not once have I seen or heard a single word about transhumanism. HL2 was about an alien race invading our dimension and stripping our world of it's resources, basically, total domination. There was not a single shred of evidence that the Combine was trying to help the humans. They were systematicaly wiping them out, or transforming them into mindless slaves for their own purpose, using Dr. Breen as a go between. -Moocats 17:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Dr. Breen tried to convince people he was a helper - he was 'elevating' humankind, and the combine troopers were actually called the 'Transhuman arm of the Combine Overwatch'. Look again. --Joffeloff 23:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

2001: A Space Odyssey

Maybe 2001 should be added to this article? --Jfbolus 07:39, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

The Bicentennial Man

What about a discussion on the idea of robot transforming into a human? --G1076 17:28, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

The Culture - Iain M. Banks

The Culture novels take place between (approx) 1300 AD and 2100 AD - so it can't be described as "the future". --(Unsigned)

Other Media

In the next few days I'm going to comb through this article pretty heavily; adding in new material, tidying up some paragraphs, and just doing a bit of sprucing up. I'll be in here with more info, but I'm debating adding a section for Comics since I think that's significant enough a body of work to get it's own. Who knows. --Human.v2.0 23:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

This article is going in the wrong direction

Both the novel section and TV section are starting to read like WP:Embedded lists, which ultimately will cause problems by violating WP:STYLE. I suggest you try to summarize the sections, compare and contrast how Transhumanism is portrayed differently between different media formats. Talk about a limited number of examples in each section (3 or 4) and create a Category, or WP:List so that the other examples have a place to go, and aren't deleted whole-cloth later.--Sparkygravity (talk) 16:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Despite all the work I've done on the Transhumanism, I've decided not work on the Transhumanism in fiction article. However, I agree with Sparkygravity. --Loremaster (talk) 17:34, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Transhumanism in fiction

So you deleted most of the page, didn't add anything to it, or try to find citations for the material that was there. And hell! since the article is basically just a stub, you might as well go ahead and nominate it for AfD..... Is this what you do, on wikipedia? destory articles?

I'm not saying the article is great, in fact, I'd even go as far as saying as it sucks... but you deleted a lot of peoples good faith edits in trying to make the article more complete. Why don't you try educating the editors of transhumanism in fiction to add citations to their additions? Explain to them why it's important to cite their additions?

I don't really have a problem with you deleting uncited additions, but in this case I don't really think your making the article better, or helping wikipedia.--Sparkygravity (talk) 12:13, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

The citation tags were there for weeks, and the article was uncited forever. Not only were no citations added, no-one made any indication on the talk page that references existed or that they intended to find them. Deleting original research, fan musings and lies improves wikipedia in my opinion. Even the lead isn't true - transhumanism is very little explored in science fiction to any depth, hence why no reliable sources can be found - calling every cyborg in fiction transhuman is ORYobmod (talk) 12:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

That's a fair assessment. I agree that the article Transhumanism in fiction was mostly a collection of fan musings and OR... and that made the article suck. But it's not like people are paid to work on wikipedia, typically they come to wikipedia untrained with an only a desire to add something to the collective project. If those fledgling attempts are simply deleted wholescale, it makes you look like a bully with a lofty self opinion, and us wikipedians look like a online society of elitist snobs. I'm always disappointed that what new editors are most likely to find on wikipedia is discouragement. Their posts are deleted, they're told "your doing it wrong", "your addition doesn't have any value", and "don't add anything if you can't do it right". That's what I see awaits new wikipedians, and I find that disheartening.

The people who add OR aren't a bunch of villainous idiots, they're usually people who need a little encouragement and education about the spirit of wikipedia. Which means you don't just post your fan musings, but you put in a little work into an article, cite your sources. Why? because you want to do it.. Everybody on wikipedia wants their contributions to make a difference and be a part of the legacy. That's not going to happen if posts are deleted without any communication between editors.

So this is what I'm asking of you. Did you try to talk to any of these editors before you deleted their posts? When they go looking for a reason their contribution was deleted, who is going to answer them back, a person, or a protocol?

And it's an important question... people work together, people can communicate, find common goals and make compromises. Protocol is just another level of bureaucracy, designed to make a certain task more efficient.--Sparkygravity (talk) 10:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

If they choose to contest the deletion, they can do it on the talk page same as everyone else. I treat everyone equally here - treating newbies as children is just as much discrimination as auto reverting IP addresses. I left edit summaries, stating that i was deleting uncited original research, this is more than enough to start a dialog.Yobmod (talk) 08:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I feel this article is relevant to the point I'm trying to make http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?STORY_ID=10789354--Sparkygravity (talk) 13:55, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, the link i cannot access. Maybe you should adopt some of these users? Like the page creator: User talk:Schaefer, He's only been here 6 times longer than I Yobmod (talk) 15:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

sigh, I have no idea why the link won't work seeing how if I input the copy the link in the address bar it works fine.... If you interested, and I hope you are, you can type "Battle for Wikipedia's soul" in google search and it's an article published by the economist.--Sparkygravity (talk) 10:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah, now i've read it, but it seems to have no bearing here. I'm not deleting trivia, i removed untrue original research. I would be glad to see every pokemon have a page, if they had reliable sources indicating notability. But including psychic-type pokemon (eg Mew II) here as examples of transhumanist pets would require a citation, the same as including other "examples" from fanboy favourites.

Btw, i've added the only citations to the remaining article.Yobmod (talk) 12:30, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

"Hob"

The "Hob" story arc at the Dresden Codak site beginning here http://www.dresdencodak.com/cartoons/dc_032.htm and ending here http://www.dresdencodak.com/cartoons/dc_058.html involves transhuman elements, the advance of technology and their effects on the future and the future's past. The artwork is excellent and the story is very... I don't know what words could describe it but it's not difficult to follow- especially since one can read it through now without having to wait for the irregular updates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 21:22, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Ayreon

Ayreons album '01011001' deals with transhumanism, perhaps it should be referenced somewhere within this article?

AMCHornet (talk) 02:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Transhumanism in fiction, the article that no longer exists

I'd like to point out the differences between what the article is now, verses what it was in the past. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Transhumanism_in_fiction&diff=193107871&oldid=181443070

Although I agree with yobmod that the previous article has many problems, I contend that it contains a wealth of examples that could possibly be considered topics in "transhumanism in sci-fiction" and that... in fact the previous state of the article although being a very bad, is actually more informative and representative of transhumanism in fiction than the article we have today.

As such, I will be checking back shortly, with this discussion before restoring the article to it's imperfect glory. I still contend that wikipedia is about adding content, and fixing OR or "fan musings" by putting them in proper reference and with citations, rather than deleting sections wholescale is the proper conduct when dealing with bad articles. If you don't want to put in the effort, the delete button is not the solution.--Sparkygravity (talk) 18:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Resoring the false originalresearch to this page would clearly not be to the benfit of the encylopedia. I would oppose readding OR, which is against policy.YobMod 17:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

As Transhumanism doesn't exist, the only broad examples we have come from fiction, futurists, and speculation. It is thorough the works of fiction that transhumanism receives much of it's definition and formulaic identity. Unfortunately the examples in this article were broad, and now are exceedingly narrow and few. The previous state of the article, though bad, gave a more through and realistic representation of the connection between fiction and transhumanism.--Sparkygravity (talk) 15:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

This article is not a list

Just because you can think of a story or work that features transhumanist ideas does not mean it belongs on this page. We can set up a list if needed, but this page should be about the most notable, influential, and central transhumanist works and artists/authors. Additionally, we can expand on the entries much more here than we could on a list page. We can describe what makes them transhumanist and what makes them important.

– Raelifin2 (talk) 00:08, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

__Myself I do like a collection or a list of prominent examples. The current hot-linked list of " In television and film" is a terrible error because many do not go to specific examples of trans-humanism, they just go to the main description. --Mark v1.0 (talk) 19:23, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Transhumanism in The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya

im familiar with the franchise but i dont understand how it fits this category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.130.9.139 (talk) 13:53, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Istvan book notability

Istvan has an article himself. But is there evidence that his book has any notability? Beyond a few blog reviews, it appeared to sink without trace - David Gerard (talk) 11:02, 6 July 2022 (UTC)