Talk:Ursula K. Le Guin

Date of photo is probably incorrect
The photo of Le Guin on the article (File:Ursula Le Guin (3551195631) (cropped).jpg) is dated to 2009, according to the caption. This date comes from the Oregon State University's Flickr page linked in the image description. I believe this date is incorrect. The picture is credited to Marian Wood Kolisch, who died in 2008. I suspect the 2009 date might be a mislabeling by OSU, or the date that they digitized the photo, not the date that it was actually taken.

I bring this up because I noticed that the copy of The Wind's Twelve Quarters that I checked out from my local library contains that photo (lower-resolution, but still the same photo, and credited to Kolisch). The copyright page says "Reissued in Perennial 2004", so I believe it must have been taken no later than 2004. I have been unable to find the actual date from searching the Internet though. -- cathartid - talk 04:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for raising this; it does seem incorrect, but likewise, I cannot track down the photo's origins. I have commented out the caption for the time being. We don't have a ton of photos for Le Guin, and this is certainly the best of them; it would be a pity to remove it. I'll keep digging, and hopefully some talk page watchers will too. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:33, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * When you say "it would be a pity to remove it" are you suggesting that you think the photo might be nonfree because OSU might not have had the right to license it?
 * Anyway, as far as I can tell, the original physical copy of the photo is probably in the possession of the Oregon Historical Society, so I guess contacting them might be the best way to get information on the date of the photo and clarification of the copyright status. See the OHS catalog entry and the overview of the Marian Wood Kolisch collection. -- cathartid - talk 01:32, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * No, I don't have reason to think the licensing is incorrect, but there's an argument to be made that we should use a dateable image. The catalog entry isn't loading for me; is it for this image, or for the collection? If the latter, how were you able to deduce that that was the image source? Vanamonde (Talk) 04:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I guess their server is down now, but the catalog entry was for the collection, and linked to the overview of the collection which I also linked. The overview page lists "LeGuin" (twice) in the "Portraits" column, among many other photo subjects.  Since this is a collection of Marian Wood Kolisch's work, and photo we are interested in is credited to Kolisch, I thought it was very likely that the photo is in this collection.  It looks like Kolisch could have taken more photos of Le Guin over the many years that she was an active photographer, and Kolisch's work was split up amongst multiple institutions (Portland Art Museum has a different photo, but I could not find the one we have there), so I am not so sure now.  However, this site run by the OHS says "The majority of [Kolisch's] photographs are in the permanent collection of the Portland Art Museum, with a smaller selection, along with negatives and interviews, in the Davies Family Research Library at the Oregon Historical Society" and doesn't mention other institutions, so I guess there is still a good chance that OHS has it. -- cathartid - talk 06:43, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

I contacted the Oregon Historical Society Research Library (libreference@ohs.org). This is what I wrote:

And they responded with:


 * The sheet of negatives looks like it notes 8/95. There are a few other dates but I think those refer to later processing/touchup.

So it seems that the best available information indicates that the photo was taken in August 1995. would this be good enough to update the caption on the article and the image descriptions on Commons? Does this date need to be cited somehow? cathartid - talk 00:33, 13 October 2022 (UTC)


 * to be quite honest we're moving outside my realm of knowledge. For an image hosted on commons, I suggest you contact the commons volunteer response team, and see what they say. We'd want the description updated there before making the change here. Vanamonde (Talk) 02:54, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I emailed info-commons for help, and was told that Commons does not have a verifiability policy (commons:Commons:Verifiability), so I could just update it, which I have done. cathartid - talk 15:17, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, thank you for seeing this through. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:13, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Nothing to add. Just wanted to thank and congratulate you on doing this good and tedious work. Thank you. x :)  SP00KY  talk  18:08, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Relevant NYT Article (8/17/2023) Worth Adding - or Not?
Recent NYT article (8/17/2023), entitled "The Essential Ursula K. Le Guin", seems relevant - however - ref added recently, but then reverted.

QUESTION: Is the article reference worth adding somewhere in the main article? - or not? - Comments Welcome - in any case - Stay Safe and Healhty !! - Drbogdan (talk) 21:40, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Drbogdan, is there any new information in the NYT article that can be used to expand the article? Is there any unsourced information in the body of this article that the NYT article would support, where citing it would make sense? Schazjmd   (talk)  21:59, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * (and others) - Thank You for your comments - and question(s) - actually, I'm very new to this WikiArticle and was hoping those more familiar with the article could better answer your question(s) - for my part - it's *entirely* ok with me either way - if there is a place in the article for the ref, then perhaps the ref should be added; if there is not a place, then the ref should not be added - if interested (and fwiw), should note that my own related NYT comments were recently published along with the NYT article - in any case - hope this helps in some way - Thanks again for your comments and all - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 23:48, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I just read the article, and I don't believe there is any new information in it; it's a retrospective of her most famous works, but dozens (if not hundreds) of articles of this sort exist. As they don't go into detail into any particular aspect of either her writing or her personal life, it's usually the case that they do not provide new information. Vanamonde (Talk) 00:48, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Stellaris
She and many other scifi authors are mentioned in the videogame Stellaris, should this be included in the article? https://stellaris.paradoxwikis.com/Patch_2.2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2806:267:7400:871A:2046:8B2E:1001:F6F6 (talk) 17:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think being mentioned in a videogame is significant to her biography. Schazjmd   (talk)  18:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)