Jump to content

Talk:William Gibson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleWilliam Gibson is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 25, 2008.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 26, 2007Good article nomineeListed
October 26, 2007WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
January 21, 2008Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 17, 2017.
Current status: Featured article

MIstakes

[edit]

Seems that the age.caulculations mentions that he in hes 60s but the next picture mentions his 70th birthday? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.68.146.169 (talk) 22:18, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's William S. Burroughs, not William Gibson, on that photo. Although it's clearly stated in the description, I got caught and confused too, googling about Gibson's age and story of this photo for a couple of minutes, before I realized this isn't a photo of him. To be honest I can't see a good reason behind placing a photo from another writer's birthday party in this article. Even if Burroughs had much influence on Gibson's writing - his birthday seem not to be an important event for Gibson. 134.191.220.74 (talk) 14:49, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Citation dump

[edit]

To counter post-Featured Article obsolescence, I am going to use this section as a workspace for updating the article with new developments. Older, un(der)used sources are also needed. Feel free to add links to new stories, interviews, podcasts, book reviews and so on related to Gibson. Skomorokh 16:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Aleo-Carreira, Cyndy (2008-07-28). "William Gibson's fiction comes to life with dark clouds". Retrieved 2008-07-30. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  • Shawl, Nisi (July 25 2008). ""Mirrored Heavens": Taking cyberpunk to the stratosphere". The Seattle Times. The Seattle Times Company. Retrieved 2008-07-30. …cyberpunk, that romanticized vision of the near-future first popularized by William Gibson. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  • Anders, Charlie Jane (July 24 2008). "Great Opening Sentences From Science Fiction". io9. Gawker Media. Retrieved 2008-07-30. "The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." — William Gibson, Neuromancer. People always cite this as a great opening line, and it's easy to see why. It's such a vivid image.…"They set a slamhound on Turner's trail in New Delhi, slotted it to his pheromones and the color of his hair." — Count Zero by William Gibson. Okay, come on. This is just so fun. It's got the wacky jargon: "slamhound," "slotted," and the idea that it can be tied to random things like hair color and pheromones. And it's crackling with energy! {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  • Newitz, Annalee (July 25 2008). "io9 Comic-Con Panel: Personal Confessions About the Scifi That Changed Our Lives". io9. Gawker Media. Retrieved 2008-07-30. Next Austin Grossman talked about three novels that he considers a kind of cross-decade trilogy about nerd power and political agency. He described the way William Gibson's Neuromancer offered him a picture of the future that was totally different from his parents' idea of the future: "It didn't contain the Cold War," he said wryly. "It was full of things they didn't understand, like computers." {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  • Markoff, John (November 25 1990). "Ideas & Trends; Art Invents A Jarring New World From Technology". The New York Times. The New York Times Company. Retrieved 2008-07-30. SIX years ago, a young and unknown science-fiction writer captured a cult following with his first novel, "Neuromancer." The writer, William Gibson, struck a chord with his vision of a dark, computerized future filled with ultrafast data networks and populated by technologically adept, low-life hustlers living in an urban dystopia called The Sprawl. Mr. Gibson's style, which borrowed from the genre of hard-bitten detective novels, and his vision, which was quickly dubbed cyberpunk, were soon imitated by dozens of other writers. The result has been a kind of literature written for a subculture of computer enthusiasts who believe that while technology often becomes a tool of oppression, it can be liberated from its makers and used to oppose the establishment. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  • Tatsumi, Takayuki (2006). "Junk Art City, or how Gibson meets Thomasson in Virtual Light". Full Metal Apache. Durham: Duke University Press. pp. p.121. ISBN 0822337746. Now, in the post-eighties, William Gibson, a representative flower child, wants to sketch a self-reflexive and self- recycling cyberscape in which even self-reflexive metafiction is even involved {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)
  • "Interview" from Bloomberg Night Talk, July 3, 2008; Spook Country and 9/11
  • http://www.bluntmag.co.za/site/awdep.asp?depnum=27645
  • http://www.popmatters.com/pm/post/63385/gameratis/
  • http://radar.oreilly.com/2008/09/offon-trend-and-ubiquitous-com.html
  • Review:The Log of the Mustang Sally
  • http://articles.latimes.com/print/2007/aug/10/entertainment/et-gibson10

http://articles.latimes.com/print/1993-09-12/magazine/tm-34172_1_gibson-s-books

Latest interview

[edit]

New Yorker Magazine article / interview Dec 2019 [1]

William Gibson and Cory Doctorow, October 2010. -- Quiddity (talk) 21:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ZH era interviews, from the WGB. Skomorokh 22:38, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
jackmovemag. Skomorokh 08:26, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Potential splits

[edit]

The article is currently a ponderous 92kb long. There are many many more unused reliable sources to fuel further expansion. The Works of William Gibson split seemed to work out well. I'd be interested in developing some of the content into more FA-grade material.

So, does anyone have any suggestions/ideas/concerns on which sections would make good starts for split articles? the skomorokh 17:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The length doesn't seem too problematic yet (WP:SIZE notwithstanding); the recently promoted Frank Zappa is a good 25% larger (by scrolling-height). I'd rather see this article grow for a while longer, and the other content within {{Gibsonian}} get improved. Spread the love! (for a good/featured topic perhaps?)
(That said, I am an unrepentant mergist...) As the main author and sourcer(er), you would have the best notions as to which topics are undercovered. Just let us know where we can help :) -- Quiddity (talk) 19:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And I a diehard splittist (e.g.)! I'm not going to be growing this article any further, because it's more productive and rewarding to expand on less-developed content, for example Disneyland with the Death Penalty and Agrippa (a book of the dead).
Another (underhanded) factor is the completeness requirement of FT/GT: if they were all feautered, we could get away with, for example, William Gibson, Early life of William Gibson and Works of William Gibson as a featured topic, but not WG, WOWG, Pattern Recognition and Neuromancer because the other works would be arbitrarily omitted. That actually gives me the idea of building Sprawl trilogy and Bridge trilogy, which would pass, but those articles are so abysmal I wouldn't know where to begin.
From a reader's perspective, though, this article is a lot to take in on a single subject. I'd like it trimmed to the most relevant and interesting bits at, say, 50kb, without losing the content from Wikipedia. Though it's probably my favourite section, the Collaborations section is probably overdetailed for an overview of Gibson, but it wouldn't amount to a very long article of its own. Influences and reception would make a very long, but very bad article, as most of the refs on the topic are ("omg he invented the internets!")...poor. I'll have to mull this over some more... the skomorokh 16:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do like your "Early life" proposal. (And agree that the "Influence and recognition" section is the only one I'd really object to splitting out.)
Were you thinking of moving some of the "Collaborations" section into WOWG? or as a 2nd split?
Lastly, as a curveball, the simple:William Gibson space is still empty... ;) -- Quiddity (talk) 19:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, problem is, there is notoriously little to say about Gibson's early life. I'd only move some of Collaborations into WOWG if I intended on converting the latter to prose, and seeing as it is now featured as a list, that would probably be counter-productive. A second split wuold take the form of a prose version of WOWG minus the parts with articles of their own; Non-notable leftovers of William Gibson would be interesting to write, and I may get to it one of these years. For the moment I am taking your suggestion to spread the love, working up each of the sickliest Gibson stubs (Hubertus Bigend and Skinner's Room) into something that would survive an Afd.
As for a Gibson article for Simple English Wikipedia: isn't that just a license to pen a gushing original research profile in patronising language? Hmmm! the skomorokh 18:00, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awards

[edit]

I created an awards subpage for development before poting to the mainspace. The Locus index is a reliable source for all the notable SF awards. For coprehensiveness we just need to identify the non-genre awards he has been nominated for.YobMod 16:29, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moved into the namespace at Awards and nominations of William Gibson.  Skomorokh  19:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wrong on Cyberspace, unbelievably right on avatars

[edit]

The article's "Visionary influence and prescience" section doesn't seem to admit that Gibson's cyberspace isn't remotely how it has turned out. I'm not sure how to put that criticism into this article.

We don't fly between geometric representations of data hubs by frantically tapping access code on a hot-rod deck, we simply type in a URL or click a link. We don't see any representation of cyberspace during navigation at all. We don't jack in at all, we watch a conventional screen. Even when we use Virtual reality, it is something that takes place within a URL or site. Here is Bobby the wannabe's understanding of the matrix from Count Zero:

He'd used decks in school, toys that shuttled you through the infinite reaches of that space that wasn't space, mankind's unthinkably complex consensual hallucination, the matrix, cyberspace, where the great corporate hotcores burned like neon novas, data so dense you suffered sensory overload if you tried to apprehend more than the merest outline.

To give you an idea of how different navigating the internet is from the mechanisms of Gibson's matrix, here is someone guiding Bobby to get hack into the Yakuza via a back door:

"When you punch out past the Basketball," Jammer said to Bobby, "you wanna dive right three clicks and go for the floor, I mean straight down..
"Past the what?"
"Basketball. That's the Dallas-Fort Worth Sunbelt Co-Prosperity Sphere, you wanna get your ass down fast, all the way, then you run how I told you, for about twenty clicks. It's all used-car lots and tax accountants down there, but just stand on that mother, okay?"
...
Bobby jacked.
He followed Jammer's instructions, secretly grateful that he could feel Jackie beside him as they plunged down into the workaday depths of cyberspace, the glowing Basketball dwindling above them. The deck was quick, superslick, and it made him feel fast and strong.

(these "clicks" seem to be distances, not buttons) Is it OK to quote big chunks of the books this way?

Meanwhile, almost as a throwaway Gibson fleshes out the idea of an avatar in an online social space just a page later in Count Zero. This is in 1986, a year before Habitat and I think is breathtakingly prescient. Is it original research to claim that Gibson was there before anyone else?

A square of cyberspace directly in front of him flipped sickeningly and he found himself in a pale blue graphic that seemed to represent a very spacious apartment, low shapes of furniture sketched in hair-fine lines of blue neon. A woman stood in front of him, a sort of glowing cartoon squiggle of a woman, the face a brown smudge. "I'm Slide," the figure said, hands on its hips, "Jaylene. You don't fuck with me. Nobody in L.A." she gestured, a window suddenly snapping into existence behind her"fucks with me. You got that?"
"Right," Bobby said. "What is this? I mean, if you could sort of explain.." He still couldn't move. The "window" showed a blue-gray video view of palm trees and old buildings.
"How do you mean?"
"This sort of drawing. And you. And that old picture.
"Hey, man, I paid a designer an arm and a leg to punch this up for me. This is my space, my construct. This is L.A., boy. People here don't do anything without jacking. This is where I entertain!

Awesomeness! -- Skierpage (talk) 00:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

Regarding reference 126 ^ "Books of the year 2003". Books & Arts (The Economist). 2003-12-04. Retrieved 2007-08-06. This is cited as the source of the quote "The future is already here – it's just not evenly distributed." There was no issue of the Economist published on December 4. I checked to see if this was a dating error and examined the April 12 issue but I could not find this quote either. Perhaps it is in another issue. He does say this in a National Public Radio Interview (NPR interview (30 November 1999 Timecode 11:55)http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1067220 but I am not sure if this is the original source as he states he has said this many times. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.239.198.98 (talk) 22:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for raising this, and I agree that Gibson has used this phrase in many different locations. The reason I selected the Economist reference at the time was that it was the earliest version of the quote I could verify in an authoritative source. The link does say December 4, 2003, and may have not appeared in the print edition at that time. I have no objection to replacing The Economist with the NPR ref (as it is earlier), but am not in a position to do so right now. If you want, please go ahead, the template you would need is {{cite interview}}. Thanks for your interest!  Skomorokh  14:12, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would also suggest that you switch citation, mainly because the economist one is behind a paywall and is of no use whatsoever to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.214.103.11 (talk) 22:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gibson's Twitter - Interesting comment about Neuromancer

[edit]

William Gibson lists his Twitter account @GreatDismal on his official website, at http://www.williamgibsonbooks.com/blog/blog.asp, so it's pretty safe to say that it's really him. Just a few hours ago, he said "Neuromancer was a conscious critique of all the mainstream SF I'd read up to that point. Why it worked, IMO." I think that's a pretty interesting revelation about what he intended with the work. How (or should?) we work that into this article and the article for Neuromancer? J0lt C0la (talk) 06:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointer, interesting comment indeed! I agree that the Twitter account is a safe bet; the only worry would be how serious/considered these tweets are. Thoughts half-formed, cast off lightly perhaps. In any case, this is the tweet in question. I'll think it over some more.  Skomorokh  10:43, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Continuing the Twitter idea, if someone is alive and uses Twitter (verified accounts only maybe), would it be interesting to anyone / relevant to put said account info in the at-a-glance section at the top? GreatDismal Cus.moritz (talk) 02:46, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removed section: Gibson's favorite SF novels

[edit]

In May 2010, Gibson listed his favorite science fiction books for New York magazine:[1]

Removed as trivial, needs fleshing out and context to be useful. Skomorokh 13:58, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Typo?

[edit]

This must be a typo since further up the article it is stated they met in 1981: "One of the things that made me like Bruce Sterling immediately when first I met him, back in 1991." 24.4.132.165 (talk) 09:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's what the source says, but it's a translation of a transcription so presumably they got the year off by a decade. Skomorokh 10:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Latest trilogy or Bigend books

[edit]

Source of name: In April, someone had changed the navbox template to say "Bigend books", and pointed to Gibsons's tweet here as verification.

A named account had suggested "Bigend trilogy" earlier in March, here and here.

The List of works of William Gibson doesn't currently call them anything.

Just noting. -- Quiddity (talk) 20:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neither fans nor media have coalesced on a particular name for the trilogy, so I thought it best we left it unnamed for the time being too... Skomorokh 22:36, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The new novel Agency isn't out intil 31 DEC 2018 according to Amazon. [2] Should thie April date be updated? 313-matt (talk) 19:17, 21 March 2018 (UTC)313-matt[reply]

References

  1. ^ Nast, Condé. "How William Gibson Keeps His Science Fiction Real". The New Yorker. Retrieved 2019-12-16.
  2. ^ https://www.amazon.com/Agency-William-Gibson/dp/110198693X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1521659822&sr=8-1&keywords=gibson+agency

bloated

[edit]

This article is long enough without padding it with unnecessary pics of the Clash and Burroughs and so forth. How about some trimming? 72.229.55.38 (talk) 06:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The images are to break up the monotony of the text; if you can find more relevant ones that would be great, but it is quite difficult to source freely-licenced images from the post-war pre-internet era. Skomorokh 14:27, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pre 1982 "Cyberspace"

[edit]

The concept of "cyberspace" was a key topic in course i took in college. I don't recall the year I was in that course but I graduated in 1979. Clearly the term was not invented in 1982. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.196.235 (talk) 19:14, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I came here to check on the coinage of "cyberspace".
  • This says that Damien Broderick claims the authorship of the word, but gives no other details.
  • An article, available here if you're willing to pay, but of which I have the original newspaper cutting, says:
  • "... Gibson is the man whose 1984 novel, Neuromancer, is generally credited with having coined the term "cyperspace" (although Australian writer Damien Broderick probably beat him to it, technically speaking), and who ......". (James Bradley, "In the Beginning Was the End", review of Gibson's All Tomorrow's Parties, Sydney Morning Herald, 11 December 1999, Spectrum, p. 12s)

caption on photo '69th birthday 1983'

[edit]

which is is rather strange, if he was indeed born in 1948. the image data says it is his 70th, but 1983 does not really allow him either age. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.16.41.96 (talk) 17:04, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the caption refers to William S. Burroughs, who has always been old as dirt. The Interior (Talk) 17:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're right about the 69/70 discrepancy, fixed. The Interior (Talk) 18:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Schools

[edit]

In the Childhood, itinerance, and adolescence section, there are three educational institutions whose links redirect back to this article. Specifically, they are Pines Elementary School, George Wythe High School, and Southern Arizona School for Boys.

Which, if any, of the redirects should be retargeted to the cities in which the schools are located? Which, if any, of the redirects should be deleted? SoledadKabocha (talk) 19:05, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the wikilinks, and I now have a question about George Wythe High School. The link in the article was originally George Wythe High School (Wytheville, Virginia). However, George Wythe High School without the parenthetical disambiguator redirects to Richmond Public Schools#High schools. Is that the same school?
What should be done about the other redirects? SoledadKabocha (talk) 04:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Buzz Rickson's collaboration

[edit]

I didn't want to jump in and start bashing at a fairly well-tended page, as a long-out-of-practice editor, but I thought the page could do with some mention of one of Gibson's weirder side projects: he has a clothing line, in collaboration with the Japanese company Buzz Rickson's. It's fairly un-Googleable, as BR's main website - http://www.buzzricksons.jp/top.html - is usually a wrapper around their latest catalog, but the *current* link is http://bookshelf.wisebook3.jp/bookstore/h5/toyoenterprise/2500/#57 .

BR does very accurate reproductions of military clothing, basically, and Gibson referenced them in one of his more recent novels, Pattern Recognition, saying one of the characters wore a black Buzz Rickson's MA-1 - this is mentioned in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cayce_Pollard#Apparel . Ultimately as a result of this, BR approached Gibson about releasing a black version of their MA-1 as a collaboration, and the line was later expanded to include black versions of various other BR items.

Seems like a fun/interesting thing to note, anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdamWill (talk • contribs) 20:49, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your reversion of my edits to William Gibson

[edit]

(This is a continuation of a discussion at User talk:Ylee#Your reversion of my edits to William Gibson.)

"On the side" is irrelevant whether used literally or metaphorically. If literally, it is unnecessary and redundant; if metaphorically, well, we should avoid metaphors in encyclopedic writing. The context, including the "I don't really use it for anything" quote, already establishes for the reader that Gibson rarely used his modem (not necessarily "at all" as you claim); "on the side" is thus both a metaphor to avoid and, given the context, unnecessary.

The reliable source states that Gibson used BBS lingo. That he himself did not participate in BBS culture directly does not change that he was exposed to such lingo from his social circles. I will reword the sentence to clarify, though.

This isn't a lengthy section on Gibson's exposure to and use of (or lack thereof) to computers; it's one paragraph that is part of a much larger article. Given that, and given his statements on the subject span many years, some jumping around is unavoidable. In fact, it is precisely that the time contexts (of necessity) varies in the paragraph why we should avoid anything other than the simple past tense, including avoiding the past perfect form. Ylee (talk) 18:14, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a featured article. When such an article grows by accretion, the originally flow, content, and context suffers. If you edit to cut content to fit your idea of style, the article suffers. You should have discussed my changes to you edits before removing. You did not. If you do not follow such a procedure, Wikipedia doesn't work? In particular, your dismissal of the close and important connection between Gibson's creations, computing, and culture does this article a disservice. At this point section 4 requires a rewrite. I'll do that, and post a new section on this talk page. - Neonorange (talk) 23:25, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on William Gibson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on William Gibson. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:13, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on William Gibson. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:49, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on William Gibson. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:26, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on William Gibson. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:12, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on William Gibson. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:30, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Citation

[edit]

Hello...this is my first time talking to anyone since being a Wiki editor: I messed up and deleted a section from External Links. I was trying to add a link to myself, as I am the one who wrote the transcript to the movie "No Maps For These Territories"—I didn't know that I should've used "User:Memory palace", and also probably put the link in the wrong place (outside the }} which deleted the whole citation). Will someone read this? Help! (The edit doesn't seem to have showed up in the change log, but the missing section sure is missing!) C. Wade (talk) 02:04, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Done: I've reverted your edit, and verified that the section and line appear. In my own opinion, who performed a transcription isn't necessarily worth space in an encyclopedia, since it's not a work of authorship. If it were a translation, I'd agree, particularly since a work might be translated differently by different translators. But if it's a transcription, the theory is that it should just be an accurate written account of someone else's spoken words. Someone else's authorship, in other words. Bill Woodcock (talk) 05:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fair play. And if anyone is interested, I do have a disclaimer with my name on it. I'm not seeing the reversion, though...does it take time to marinate? C. Wade (talk) 01:43, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the change immediately. Above is the current version, tinted green, below is the previous revision, tinted red. Is that not what you're seeing?
Also, the right place for this discussion is probably on the No Maps for These Territories Talk Page. Bill Woodcock (talk) 09:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree, re: this discussion belonging on the No Maps page, as it pertains to the William Gibson article. And I *still* don't see the change live on the article. I would do this myself - by reverting to a previous instance and grabbing the correctly-formatted citation from there - but weirdly, the citation doesn't appear anywhere in the past revisions, almost as if it was deleted from history itself. I am probably going to have to just learn how to make a citation and re-publish it, but as you can see from my previous unsuccessful attempt, I am not heartened, thus this request for assistance...

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:William_Gibson&oldid=1252198327"