Talk:Uplift (science fiction)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Science Fiction (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


Great Ape Trust[edit]

The Great Ape Trust is NOT an experiment in uplift. This is "biological" uplift, not "cultural" uplift. In the Great Ape Trust, there is no attempt to alter the biological (e.g. genetic) structure of the apes. I plan to remove all references to the Great Ape Trust if no one objects. Samw 12:56, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

The article covers both types, and should be moved to a more general name. - Omegatron 20:27, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
How about moving the current article to "Uplift (science fiction)"? Samw 03:23, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
I don't really see a reason for moving the content... Paranoid 09:11, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
Then may I remove "Great Ape Trust". That's cultural uplift not biological. Science fiction distinguishes between "cultural contamination" and "uplift" where the species is physically changed, either genetically or via technological augmentation. Great Ape Trust is mostly a study and partly a cultural uplift where great apes are taught new things. Samw 23:40, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
How about we move the references to cultural uplift to Cultural uplift? TomDS 13:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
If you have enough material for a separate article on cultural uplift by all means. As it stands, it's useful in the current article to scope the definition of biological uplift. Samw 16:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
After a quick search it appears there is enough information for a page on cultural uplift, however it would be incorrect to say that I have enough information. TomDS 18:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Standard procedure on Wikipedia then is to keep adding material to the existing article (i.e. this one) until there's enough for the information to be split off into a separate article. Samw 04:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Bootstrapping[edit]

I think that Bootstrapping (science fiction) should be merged with this article. It appears to be the same concept, only with different literary references.

Bootstrapping appears to be cultural. This article is about physical changes to the organism so I think it merits the distinct article. Samw 01:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

2001[edit]

Should there be a reference to Arthur C. Clarke's 2001? One of the key points of the book and the movie was that the Monolith builders uplifted humanity's ancestors into sentience

I've added with a reference. Feel free to elaborate or cite more references. Samw 03:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Examples[edit]

The examples used in this article seem to be randomly selected and inserted by fans to provide exposure for books they like. If the idea is really notable, then notable examples that significantely expanded or promulagated the idea need to be identified, not simply every book that has something vaguely similar occur. My removal of 3 examples was reverted. Wikipedia is not papaer, but nor is it a collection of indiscriminate facts. If people just want to make the article into a list of books that have uplifted animals, such an article can be created. Naming a book and describing the animals in it contributes nothing understanding without context.Yobmod (talk) 07:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Point taken. Would you agree a list of books with uplift is useful? Perhaps we could convert that section into such a list with the hope that it will eventually be refactored into a separate article? (BTW, I didn't add that section originally; I just want to have as much information in Wikipedia as possible.) Samw (talk) 03:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
That would work for me. A section discussing the phenomenon, and a seperate section for a list that can be spun off as it grows.Yobmod (talk) 10:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Uncontacted people[edit]

Couldn't the term also apply to uncontacted peoples in our world? or event formerly uncontacted peoples. --Voidvector (talk) 12:05, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you assume that uncontacted people are less intelligent than others, and upon contact they are genetically engineered to make them more intelligent. Which has never happened, so no.Yobmod (talk) 12:15, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Doesn't the term "uplift" simply mean to give a civilization advanced technology and advanced cultural definition? Why does it even have to be biological/genetic? --Voidvector (talk) 13:17, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Because this article is not "Uplift", it is "biological uplift" as science fiction term. If anthropologist have a term for what you are describing, i don't know what it is.Yobmod (talk) 13:26, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
We should probably add a section on "cultural uplift" for the mere bestowment of advanced technology. Samw (talk) 00:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
But that isn't a type of "biological uplift", the SF concept that is the the subject of this article. Do you have any references about cultural uplift? If so, then make a new article.

Proposed deletion[edit]

I object to this article being deleted. While clearly it can be improved, it's been properly categorized by the SF project as "start" class and "low" importance. But that doesn't mean it should be deleted. Samw (talk) 21:25, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Mass Effect - Volus were NOT uplifted[edit]

The Volus race was not uplifted by the Turians: they were a space-faring race long before the Turians were discovered by the Council. On the other hand, both the Krogan and the Drell were uplifted respectively by the Salarian, during the Rachni War, and by the Hanar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.23.177.34 (talk) 23:32, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Unable to Edit?[edit]

There is no "edit" option on the page, as there are a couple of errors I wished to fix. 76.214.109.17 (talk) 08:25, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Nevermind. That was weird... 76.214.109.17 (talk) 08:27, 5 June 2011 (UTC)