Talk:Whole Earth Review

Removed the following paragraph, which doesn't conform to NPOV, especially "sensible and sage avenues of thought". In addition the reference which cites all WER issues from 1985-2003 for Stewart Brand's beliefs is not specific enough to support the assertion. Some of this information could be re-added to the article if reformulated in more neutral language and backed up with more specific citations. --Lexor|Talk 07:11, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Notably, the journal espoused some sensible and sage avenues of thought, such as architect Christopher Alexander's approach to building and planning. Yet the magazine could remain a lively multi-disciplinary meetingplace that didn't smack at all of academia. In everything, Stewart Brand seemed to dispay a trust in citizens' ability to make good choices, humane and inclined toward sustainability, if provided with good information.

It would also be more helpful if specific issues were cited, rather than citing all issues three times which isn't helpful at all. For example, please cite the first issue for which the following items such as space colonization etc. were mentioned:

Whole Earth always made efforts to be at the forefront of technological innovation, being the first to publish articles about speculations on space colonization, molecular nanotechnology and the technological singularity.

Robotic application of Wikipedia link policy reduces its value

Alexf removed a link I added to the "Whole Earth Review" page as inappropriate, but I protest that is highly appropriate. The link was to my essay, "Whole Earth Culture" at http://www.volny.cz/rhorvitz/whole-earth.html. I was Whole Earth's art editor for 10 years. That fact can be checked by simply looking at the masthead in any issue of CoEvolution Quarterly or the Whole Earth Review published between 1977 and 1987. My essay also appears on Whole Earth's own website as an "official history" - see http://www.wholeearth.com/history-whole-earth-culture.php. (I did not link to that version because the layout coloring makes it much harder to read than the original version, which is on my website.) My essay is also cited by the Museum of Modern Art, which has a show up now about the Whole Earth publications - see http://www.moma.org/interactives/exhibitions/2011/AccesstoTools/ under "Further Reading."

Alexf's deletion of my link reduces the informativeness of the Wikipedia page because my essay was written specifically for people outside the US, who may have no familiarity with the Whole Earth publications. It therefore provides alot of background and context usually left out of reminiscence-based essays about this subject.

I understand why Wikipedia is wary of self-promotional links. But in this case, if authors cannot link to their own work, on their own website, when they are a uniquely qualified "inside" source, then you should figure out a way to avoid denying your readers access to the best information. Rhorvitz (talk) 13:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)Rhorvitz