Talk:Dangerous Visions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.199.204.112 (talk) at 05:58, 28 March 2013. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconNovels: Short story Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Short story task force.

Ouch! Lots of top-line SF authors without Wikipedia articles! Does anyone want to start in on these?

Dangerous Visions 3

Not yet published, according to the article, yet it is possible to find second-hand copies on the Internet using the ISBN search facility. What is the true situation? --Phil | Talk 15:03, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

I suspect what you've got hold of here is part of the 3-volume paperback edition published by Sphere Books. Not a new book at all. Lee M 13:49, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Again Dangerous Visions

I suspect that an admin will be needed to disentangle this because I think the book title has the comma, but the page that Konczewski created does not have to comma. Currently there is a circular redirect. Hu 20:39, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did it really need a split?

Here we have two books in a series getting two articles, while for example the hundreds of issues of Analog get just one article. Arguably the narrative read better giving the story of the Dangerous Visions series, rather than spliting it up. Notinasnaid 23:25, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Dv35hc.jpg

Image:Dv35hc.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ISBN

The lead paragraph gives an ISBN while the infobox clearly says "NA". Would someone care to rationalize that? Varlaam (talk) 07:26, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The origin of the structure?

Now, when I read this book, and ADV as well, in the early 1970s, the structure to me seemed novel or original or unique, with its prefatory and valedictory essays on every piece. One or two sentences of introduction in a short story collection, sure; an outright essay, no.
Forty years pass. Have I personally seen a precedent for this structure? No.
Until today.
Norman Mailer's Advertisements for Myself, 1959.
So was this in fact an established style when Ellison chose to use it once again?
Varlaam (talk) 07:42, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reference for "Pathbreaking" claim?

It is pretty much well-known in the "Science Fiction world" that "Dangerous Visions" is considered to be "pathbreaking" or groundbreaking, but in the interest of correctness I wonder if this claim should be more-thoroughly referenced. I believe Robert Holdstock's "Octopus" Encyclopedia has a brief discussion of it.