Talk:Michael Talbot (author)
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Michael Talbot (author) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|The Holographic Universe was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 06 December 2008 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Michael Talbot (author). The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.|
|This page was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Start new topics with a "section heading", on a separate line, start and end the line with ==
Holographic Universe needs a separate article..
- I agree 184.108.40.206 18:45, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
- Me too. – T.O. Rainy Day —Preceding unsigned comment added by T.O. Rainy Day (talk • contribs) 06:50, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- The powers at Wikipedia dont —Preceding unsigned comment added by H0riz0n (talk • contribs) 14:42, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
- Screw Wikipedia made a separate article here —Preceding unsigned comment added by H0riz0n (talk • contribs) 02:53, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- As usual, I'm befuddled by a wikipedia editor's decision. Michael Talbot is not a notable person? A famous author in the field of science? Please. What are you afraid of -- you're going to run out of paper? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 23:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Dear wiki people, please I beg you, take off that box about notability! I have never commented on any article, but Talbot, and his book Holographic Universe, were TREMENDOUSLY influential at a pivotal moment in the history of consciousness studies, the new age moment, brain-mind theory, neurotheology, and related fields. I'm sorry that I don't have time to provide references or rewrite the article simply to persuade wikipedia to remove that sign. Let me just say that it is very discouraging as a researcher to come back after all these years and find Talbot, a seminal figure and popularizer of the field if there ever was one, with this nugatory box below his name. Please, please, please think twice before dismissing the legacy of such a truly notable figure. Sorry to make such a fuss, but Talbot was a great inspiration to me and several of my colleagues, though I never met him or anything to do with him. Alas, I wish I could joke about it like the above commenter, but it's just too distressing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 06:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I've checked and don't see any question about notability. His book is published by Harper, and has a respectable sales ranking on Amazon. I'm removing the notability template. --Parsifal Hello 06:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
This is all very interesting. What I wanted to ask in regard to this article is:
1) What was Talbot's own relationship to science. Was he a scientist himself?
2) How does the science world view his claims?
These two things are not dealt with in the article and it would be very helpful if they were.
- 1) Why is he notable.
- 2) Why are there no references in the article? Simonm223 (talk) 19:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Holographic Universe search go to Holographic principle
- Why does Holographic Universe search -- go to Holographic principle?(H0riz0n (talk) 14:48, 29 September 2009 (UTC)).
- I moved it in accordance with more usual disambig practice to Michael Talbot (author) - this meets the objections of those who disagreed above (as it makes no judgement over whether one is more notable than the other) and those who wished it moved (who said the middle name was not used extensively by the author and was not necessary). Orderinchaos 03:05, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Why was there ever a discussion about deletion of this article
Why was there ever a discussion about deletion of the article about Michael Coleman Talbot?
Probably his most important book, "The Holographic Universe" was also up for deletion. To my opinion it is one of the most important scientific books written in the last few decades. Recent scientific research done in Hannover, Germany supports his ideas. 
I think it s a bit fishy why these articles were up for deletion, just as fishy as his early death was (only a year after "the Holographic Universe" was published). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 00:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Why is the title in italics?
I don't know if it looks like this to anyone else, but to me, this article appears to be under the title 'Michael Talbot (author)' (instead of 'Michael Talbot (author)'). Looking at the source, I can't work out why this is. Can anyone provide an explanation? Robofish (talk) 22:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not why it's in italics either, but it happened during this edit. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 22:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
The article "The Universe as a Hologram
I tis my understanding after being in direct contact with the author, that this article so often attributed to Michael Talbot himself, was actually written by one Denis Jones, currently living in France. You can find the article on his webpage. I told me he wrote it and never bothered to correct others when they credited it to Talbot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 16:18, 25 April 2011 (UTC)