...and stop talking to Larry (Lawrence) Kasdan.
A New Star Wars Trilogy Announced
- Thread starter Captain Dunsel
- Start date
...and stop talking to Larry (Lawrence) Kasdan.
The Vader/Luke/Emperor ending in ROTJ was just fine the way it was. But because 36 years later, "Somehow, Palpatine returned" is now canon, I guess what we are asking is/was there a BETTER way they could have handled it? There were many rumors with the ST that Snoke was in fact Palpatine's master Darth Plagueis, and so maybe they should have gone down that road instead.
Last edited:
I love how you hide your feelings (wink). Tell me what you really think..... no, no please don't..... I don't want you banhammered just because I was poking the bear.
drusselmeyer
Master Member
Okay, well that works too.
drusselmeyer
Master Member
F wikipedia too. Bunch of hacks!Not to be rude or anything but you're uh, entirely incorrect about all of that lol
Retroactive continuity - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
By your definition, Sherlock's survival of the fall at Reichenbach isn't a retcon because the later stories "reveal a secret" of how he didn't in fact die? Even though that's the specific example they use for exactly what a retcon is?
What you're describing with the lack of continuity in old serials is even given as an example of what a retcon isn't.
The collective intelligence of Wikipedia:
drusselmeyer
Master Member
BTW people who can actually write are stunned when they scrutinize the actual protagonist/antagonist dynamic for themselves.
Last edited:
I just found that on wikipedia they have utterly denied the source of aspirin in history was willow bark. What raving nutjob wrote that? They have locked down the page using bots to keep anyone from changing it. The page opens with "aspirin is an organic substance that does not exist in nature".... um what??? They continue on about how it was created in a lab after many years of effort. But, of course, cannot explain why anyone would have guessed at what they were "efforting" all that time if they had no natural substance they were attempting to replicate..... as in, duh, you don't just wander into the lab one day and "effort" your way into guessing what would be a wonderful pain killer. But, giving it the benefit of a full read, I slogged through to the end. At first I thought maybe they had mistyped and meant "is found in nature" but then saw a collapsed section about Willow. I opened it to find this article refutes 3000 years of historical evidence, one source at a time, while claiming that "there is no proof whatsoever that anyone, prior to 1997, thought that willow was used for a painkiller . At this time (1997) an article was written, and if taken out of context, may seem to associate Willow bark with Aspirin." The reference was also to how this 1997 article was "quite a bit in the past" so I am guessing that Wikipedia's 'the history of aspirin' was written by a twelve year old. But to then lock it down using nanny bots because you can't handle being called out on your false narrative?
Wikipedia is almost as accurate as "urban dictionary" where, very much like my sister's trick in gradeschool, you can write your own definition for anything and claim it is accepted truth. The best part about wikipedia's aspirin fiasco is how it shows up in the same search results as the Smithsonian's exhibit on painkillers called, "From Willow bark to Aspirin, a 3000 year Journey".
Had they just said something like, "Aspirin's chemical structure is not precisesly the same as the natural chemical it was made to mimic" but NO, they spent multiple pages and much effort to make it sound like all claims to ANY natural origin was COMPLETELY FALSE and went on and on about how no one would have even made such a claim prior to this "misreading of a 1997 article". Here is the screen cap of how it shows up first, followed by many articles by government and hospitals about how it was formulated from Willow bark research.
Wikipedia is literally the epitomy of Orwell's 1984 "everchanging library" reference to electronic rewriting of history to suit the needs of those rewriting it regardless of the truth. Something as irrevocably wrong as this aspirin article being allowed to continue and be unchangeable makes me want to vomit. I wouldn't trust another thing from wikipedia.
drusselmeyer
Master Member
Wikipedia also claims that 130 is genius IQ.
Yes, Wikipedia is double plus good!
Yes, Wikipedia is double plus good!
TimDRX
Active Member
Uhhhh, from the Wikipedia page on Aspirin;
A precursor to aspirin found in the bark of the willow tree (genus Salix) has been used for its health effects for at least 2,400 years.[11][12] In 1853, chemist Charles Frédéric Gerhardt treated the medicine sodium salicylate with acetyl chloride to produce acetylsalicylic acid for the first time.[13] Over the next 50 years, other chemists, mostly of the German company Bayer, established the chemical structure and devised more efficient production methods.[13]: 69–75 Felix Hoffmann (or Arthur Eichengrün) of Bayer was the first to produce acetylsalicylic acid in a pure, stable form in 1897.[14] By 1899, Bayer had dubbed this drug Aspirin and was selling it globally.[15]: 27
I'm shocked y'all have such a negative opinion of the place tbh. It's one of the best moderated and well maintained resources on the internet, they do amazing work. They're frequent targets of people trying to spread misinformation but in my experience it's usually swiftly spotted and reverted. If you ever see something suspect on there, check the revision history to see if it's recently been vandalized and you'll find the correct version ready to be restored.
Trying not to get too heated / serious about this but Wikipedia is genuinely one of the greatest human achievements of our time and it is frankly heartbreaking to see it being so casually dismissed.
Tan Djarka
Sr Member
Works for me. Instead of being frustratingly close, I'm actually a genius!
I'm not sure how anyone could read that and not understand his point:
He goes on for several thousand words claiming the association doesn't exist.
He goes on for several thousand words claiming the association doesn't exist.
drusselmeyer
Master Member
There is no such thing as gaslighting. You're just a paranoid danger to yourself and others...trust me. -anon wikipedia author. ; )
TimDRX
Active Member
For my perspective on why Wikipedia is so important you could check out this podcast from last year, where a journo interviewed a wiki editor of 18 years;
It crystallized everything I've felt about the site, especially that it's one of the few spaces left on the internet that hasn't been subjected to the growth at all costs mindset that's ruining everything else like social media and search engines
I assumed as denizens of an extremely niche community all about sharing knowledge of a craft you would naturally see how precious Wikipedia is, but I think y'all might be operating in a different baseline reality from myself and I'm starting to realize this might not be the community for me!
It crystallized everything I've felt about the site, especially that it's one of the few spaces left on the internet that hasn't been subjected to the growth at all costs mindset that's ruining everything else like social media and search engines
I assumed as denizens of an extremely niche community all about sharing knowledge of a craft you would naturally see how precious Wikipedia is, but I think y'all might be operating in a different baseline reality from myself and I'm starting to realize this might not be the community for me!
drusselmeyer
Master Member
That's kind of an extreme response to a valid criticism.
Imagine that any niche site like RPF is a microcosm rather than a bloated nebulous construct. Many of us have some specialized knowledge of things pertaining to the prop field, while others have modelling knowledge or construction knowledge or military experience or medical training. We can consult and check each other because there are stable standards of reference.
Wikipedia on the other hand is huge. There is literally too much information to properly verify on a personal level. It requires trust on a large number of other people who in turn cannot be verified locally.
The biggest downside is the lack of stability. Wikipedia today is not the same as yesterday or tomorrow. Not only because of additional information, but also because of changing opinions. Too many opinions exist there to have a cohesive frame of reference.
I would be very circumspect about calling such a thing precious. The concept is great. In practice it is dubious.
I may be terse in some statements...often for comic effect, but the facts I mention are observable.
Be careful of what you rely on.
Now back to the original topic which is about the lack of a cohesive storyline.
Imagine that any niche site like RPF is a microcosm rather than a bloated nebulous construct. Many of us have some specialized knowledge of things pertaining to the prop field, while others have modelling knowledge or construction knowledge or military experience or medical training. We can consult and check each other because there are stable standards of reference.
Wikipedia on the other hand is huge. There is literally too much information to properly verify on a personal level. It requires trust on a large number of other people who in turn cannot be verified locally.
The biggest downside is the lack of stability. Wikipedia today is not the same as yesterday or tomorrow. Not only because of additional information, but also because of changing opinions. Too many opinions exist there to have a cohesive frame of reference.
I would be very circumspect about calling such a thing precious. The concept is great. In practice it is dubious.
I may be terse in some statements...often for comic effect, but the facts I mention are observable.
Be careful of what you rely on.
Now back to the original topic which is about the lack of a cohesive storyline.
Last edited:
drusselmeyer
Master Member
I guess I should also the mention the other thing...a long time ago in a place not all that far away...
I once wrote a fanfic. It was more of a treatment than a full story so there were a lot of gaps that permitted interpretation. It was not a full script.
In those days, the web was new and I had shared my fanfic on a local network not realizing how far reaching the web actually was.
I had struggled with a title. The easy part was the Episode VII. The hard part was how to describe the story. I started with "Shades of the Empire". The implications were correct, but the language was a bit archaic. Then, I thought of "Ghost of the Empire", but the implications were misleading. I finally arrived at "Shadow of the Empire" .
Imagine my surprise when I noticed a new novel a couple of years later titled "Shadows of the Empire".
Not all the elements of my story showed up in one place but I noticed that many ended up being used eventually. Some were a little too coincidental.
I have mostly given up sharing ideas after that and never showed the rest of the trilogy to anyone. I'm not sure how much has survived after all these years since it was initially printed on an impact printer. Remember that this was all around 1990.
This partially is why I have a strong opinion about certain things and certain people.
I once wrote a fanfic. It was more of a treatment than a full story so there were a lot of gaps that permitted interpretation. It was not a full script.
In those days, the web was new and I had shared my fanfic on a local network not realizing how far reaching the web actually was.
I had struggled with a title. The easy part was the Episode VII. The hard part was how to describe the story. I started with "Shades of the Empire". The implications were correct, but the language was a bit archaic. Then, I thought of "Ghost of the Empire", but the implications were misleading. I finally arrived at "Shadow of the Empire" .
Imagine my surprise when I noticed a new novel a couple of years later titled "Shadows of the Empire".
Not all the elements of my story showed up in one place but I noticed that many ended up being used eventually. Some were a little too coincidental.
I have mostly given up sharing ideas after that and never showed the rest of the trilogy to anyone. I'm not sure how much has survived after all these years since it was initially printed on an impact printer. Remember that this was all around 1990.
This partially is why I have a strong opinion about certain things and certain people.
Sorry. Like officially. Didn't know there was some backstory to that initial reaction. Thought you were just in the camp that it wasn't George. so not acceptable.
Although the show is super campy snd awkward, your true life storyline seems to fit what was hiding in the plot of Gentleman Broncos.
ghostryder
Legendary Member
‘Star Wars’ Daisy Ridley Project Still Alive With Scribe George Nolfi
George Nolfi is re-writing the Daisy Ridley 'Star Wars' movie.
deadline.com
Similar threads
