Talk:The Transmigration of Timothy Archer

Novels Low‑importance

	Novels portal This 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.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Criticism of 'flat, stereotypical' female characters[edit]

From the article: "Angel Archer, Bishop Archer's daughter-in-law. Dick's work was often criticized for its flat, stereotypical female characters, so Angel may represent his effort to prove he could create a rich and believable feminine voice." This needs citations if it is to stay. I would like to see multiple sources of Dick's work being criticized for having stereotypical female characters to support this statement. If there are none provided within a few weeks, I will modify the statement. 64.122.56.143 (talk) 01:19, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Genre[edit]

I'll take you're word for it. I was only extrapolating from a the genre field of the infobox that was there for one of the versions, you had worked on. So all I id was to make the coding consistent. Sorry to cause a problem and well spotted. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:47, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't cause any problems. This is not an easy book to categorize. I recently ran into a similar issue over at The Cosmic Serpent. The publishing company classifies this non-fiction work as science, but after reading the book, the author's own personal opinion about the book, and the relevant criticism, one is unable to find any science at all. So, do we classify books on Wikipedia merely by what the publishing company says? If so, this could be a serious problem. I don't believe anyone has addressed this before. —Viriditas | Talk 10:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Lunborg[edit]

The character of Bill Lundborg is described in the novel as schizophrenic. No refrences are ever made to Asperger's Syndrome so the related text has been removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bardam0 (talk • contribs) 12:50, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

adding links to philipkdickfans site[edit]

I have added some links to content that appears on the official fan site for Philip K. Dick (that has be recognized by the Philip K. Dick Estate and is linked to from philipkdick.com). There is a complicated history for this site and I realize at one point it has been taken over by malware. The site has changed hands two times and the malware no longer exists on the site. The site was rebuilt from scratch, is stable and will be around for a long time.

The site now contains all the articles that the original site had with some exceptions and can be safely linked to. In addition the site has a vast section that is a reference for all the works that Philip K. Dick wrote called PKDweb or The Encyclopedia Dickiana and contains VALBS which is a reference for secondary materials published about Philip K. Dick. VALBS exist elsewhere on the Internet but this is the official copy of the information.

I would like to add links to each of Philip K. Dick's works with appropriate links from philipkdickfans.com including novel and short story pages. When I have recently made these changes, they were removed. This issue may have been that it appeared I was spamming the site because I was making several edits to several pages in one evening. I believe that the edits I would like to make fall within the External Linking Guidelines that I have read. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirfishe (talk • contribs) 14:31, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't continue to add these links without discussing them with the multiple editors who have removed them. I admire your persistence, but Wikipedia runs on consensus. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BOLD,_revert,_discuss_cycle. Rray (talk) 23:10, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the main reason that it "appears" like you're spamming is because you're not discussing your multiple additions after they've been removed. You're just re-adding all of them without discussion. This page would almost be an exception if you had waited for a reply to your attempt to start a discussion before re-adding a massive number of links to this site. I hope that doesn't sound hostile; by explaining this, I'm hoping to help you better understand how things work here so that might make a more constructive contribution to the project. Rray (talk) 23:13, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]