This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hertfordshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hertfordshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.
Booker, M. Keith (2006). "2001: A Space Odyssey". Alternate Americas: Science Fiction Film and American Culture. Praeger. pp. 75–90. ISBN0275983951.
Redner, Gregg (2010). "Strauss, Kubrick and Nietzsche: Recurrence and Reactivity in the Dance of Becoming That Is 2001: A Space Odyssey". In Bartkowiak, Mathew J. Sounds of the Future: Essays on Music in Science Fiction Film. McFarland. pp. 177–193. ISBN0786444800.
Stoehr, Kevin L. (2007). "2001: A Philosophical Odyssey". In Sanders, Steven M. The Philosophy of Science Fiction Film. The Philosophy of Popular Culture. pp. 119–134. ISBN0813124727.
User:ArtDragon1973 has hit WP:3RR on this today, so it seems to be very important for him/her to see Rob Ager's name in print. Since this person is a self-published author, his views fail WP:DUE. Also, if the purpose is to point out the HAL/IBM link (which Kubrick and Clarke always denied), it can be done without giving a name check to a self-published author.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 16:56, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I see nothing that should overturn the previous WP:CONSENSUS regarding this information. The WP:SPA account has made no attempt to explain why we should reconsider said consensus. As it stands the info can go on a facebook page but does not belong here. MarnetteD | Talk 18:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
As I said at User talk:Ianmacm, there is nothing new about the claimed IBM/HAL link, although Kubrick and Clarke always denied it, saying that it was coincidental and the invention of the film's audience. This may be worth a mention, but not in the context of a conspiracy theory proposed by an obscure film critic.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 19:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
The caption on one image on the main page shows Astronaut Poole using a "wireless tablet device" in the film. I believe this is only a console display, with no indication of wireless capability or a mobile "tablet-like" feature. This should be corrected in the main article. Lets not make more of this than what is evident for 1968 technology. I love the film but creating mythology from it is not good. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 03:56, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
In 2011, Samsung cited 2001 in its lawsuit with Apple over the iPad. The device shown here undoubtedly looks like a tablet PC, but it is stretching things to say that it is connected to a network via wireless; maybe it is, but there is not enough evidence to say this. The devices in the image cited by Samsung appear to be freestanding and placed on the table while the astronauts are eating their meals, rather than being console displays.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 05:52, 8 September 2014 (UTC)