Talk:Roger Schank

I don;t understand the diagram: it purportedly means that "Pierre's conceptualization of satisfaction (mental state) increases when Jean talks to Marie about eating candy.", whereas the french sentence accompanying it *seems* to say "Jean told Marie that Pierre likes eating candy." - which is totally different! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.201.121 (talk) 20:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Dynamic Memory is mislinked. Schank's dynamic memory was a theory of cognition which stressed memory as the main engine of understanding, and is not the link given by Wikipedia!!!!

Therefore I have taken it out.

I removed Jorn Barger reference since it is of no interest to Roger Schanks work or Jorn Barger note as an blogger.

--Rhooker1236 15:46, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The works section is missing heaps of stuff. This site: http://www.grandparentgames.com/schank/index.cfm which Schank has set up says that there are over 20 books. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.53.18 (talk) 06:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Infamous Demo
No one is going to include the famous story of the extra carriage return? DonPMitchell (talk) 21:52, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

What famous demo is that? I can't find it anywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.115.82 (talk) 11:39, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

You can't get to Roger Schank's article using Wikipedia Search box
You get this answer:

Did you mean: Roger Shack There were no results matching the query. You may create the page "Roger Shanck", but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered.

The point is that there is an existing article on Roger Shanck, but the only way I had access to it was through this link that I got in Google: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Schank

Since I dont' know how to fix that mistake, I ask someone to fix it.

Thanks!

Xenon chile (talk) 16:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Xenon_chile


 * It looks like you've typed 'Roger Shanck' into the search box rather than 'Roger Schank'... ARK (talk) 16:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Roger Schank. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111006130700/http://www.rogerschank.com/biography.html to http://www.rogerschank.com/biography.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111006151508/http://www.rogerschank.com/biography-part2.html to http://www.rogerschank.com/biography-part2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Death
Roger Schank passed away on January 30; I (one of his students; Janet Kolodner) and his wife reported it; please replace that. As to his knowing Jeffrey Epstein, what does that have to do with who he was and what he accomplished in life. It is simply a salacious comment. There's an implication that he was somehow involved with Epstein's goings on; all we know is that he knew Jeffrey Epstein. If you are really worried about the accuracy of the page, you will make it more up to date; it stops now in about 1980 when I got my Ph.D. He had another 40 years of career after that. You can find it in his obituary; you can find it in the web pages of his most recent company: Socratic Arts. I expect to see those pieces of this edited before the next time I look; I will not do it myself, as you will simply remove it as you did when I inserted his death and took out the paragraph about Jeffrey Epstein. Janet Kolodner — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.148.148 (talk • contribs) 2023-02-13T11:36:12 (UTC)
 * Sorry to hear of Roger Schank's death.
 * It would be great to have updated information on the past 40 years of his career. If your contributions follow our style guide and are well-referenced from reliable sources such as obituaries, I don't see why they'd be removed.
 * As for Jeffrey Epstein, I agree that his connection to Schank is completely incidental and doesn't belong in the article. However, we've discovered that some Wikipedia readers are hypersensitive to the perception of a "coverup" and tend to re-add material about Epstein which is not dispassionate, so as a matter of "defensive editing", a simple mention demonstrates to the reader that we're not unaware of the purported connection. However, adding editorial comments is against our principles, unless we can find a reliable source for them, e.g., an article somewhere saying "RS attended a conference organized by JE and has been unfairly tarred with guilt by association".
 * By the way, although it is perfectly acceptable to edit as an anonymous IP user, your edits will be more respected (and less likely to be reverted on sight) if you register for an account. --Macrakis (talk) 16:04, 14 February 2023 (UTC)