Editing Talk:God (RDM)/Archive 1
Discussion page of God (RDM)/Archive 1
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
:::::::As for my intentions, I thought my writing was bad and wrote most of it off the cuff, thus I was not particularly proud of it. My main intention was to generate discussion on this topic and have its possibility mentioned in the article. ''Given the cylon's are strongly rooted in the topic of AI and the idea of a technological singularity branches off of that topic, I believe it is more than reasonable to at least mention it in this article''. | :::::::As for my intentions, I thought my writing was bad and wrote most of it off the cuff, thus I was not particularly proud of it. My main intention was to generate discussion on this topic and have its possibility mentioned in the article. ''Given the cylon's are strongly rooted in the topic of AI and the idea of a technological singularity branches off of that topic, I believe it is more than reasonable to at least mention it in this article''. | ||
:::::::On a side note, please let me know if I should take my defenses personally to each member that criticizes my contributions rather than posting them here, as this page might become quite lengthy. And again, if you just demand better writing or sourcing, tell me exactly how (or refer me to the relevant section in the FAQ) and I will consider writing the article myself.--[[User:DuMan|DuMan]] 19:21, 22 June 2007 (CDT) | :::::::On a side note, please let me know if I should take my defenses personally to each member that criticizes my contributions rather than posting them here, as this page might become quite lengthy. And again, if you just demand better writing or sourcing, tell me exactly how (or refer me to the relevant section in the FAQ) and I will consider writing the article myself.--[[User:DuMan|DuMan]] 19:21, 22 June 2007 (CDT) | ||
:::::::It's not the sourcing to external sites that's the problem, but the sourcing with the show. See what Spence wrote below. If you can back it up with some references to the episodes and quotes, though they will probably be somewhat indirect, good. I'd suggest that you don't worry about style for now, but produce a bullet point list of references. Put it on your user page or maybe your talk page. Then we can see if we can really use it. If not, then we can always put in a small note without the speculation attached. | |||
:::::::While lengthy talk pages are problematic too, splitting over discussion in several talk is really confusing. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 04:52, 23 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
:I'd write it up as a separate article, and attach the following template: <nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:Plausible speculation|Plausible speculation]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki>,<strike> <nowiki>{{Essay}}</nowiki></strike>. There is precedent; see [[Cyrannus (system)]]. It is an example of plausible, researched, cited speculation, clearly marked as such, and is worthwhile. Failing that, there is always your User space. [[User:JubalHarshaw|JubalHarshaw]] 19:11, 22 June 2007 (CDT) | :I'd write it up as a separate article, and attach the following template: <nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:Plausible speculation|Plausible speculation]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki>,<strike> <nowiki>{{Essay}}</nowiki></strike>. There is precedent; see [[Cyrannus (system)]]. It is an example of plausible, researched, cited speculation, clearly marked as such, and is worthwhile. Failing that, there is always your User space. [[User:JubalHarshaw|JubalHarshaw]] 19:11, 22 June 2007 (CDT) | ||