Talk:Bridge trilogy
Add topic | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
2006
[edit]Cyborg
[edit]Can you really call a community a cyborg? Interesting word choice there. User:24.5.125.232 04:00, 22 March 2006
- Yes go to the cyborg page. User:144.139.143.171 02:17, 31 May 2006
Separation
[edit]Shouldn't there be separate articles for each of the different books in this trilogy? I'll work on them and link them to this page, but others would be more qualified. --Dark wingstalker 09:07, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- I concur. I've established the pages as stubs in need of development.Skomorokh 02:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
2007
[edit]Original research/citation
[edit]WP:NOR anyone? How about deleting the "insightful" original research and instead citing some reviews? 80.186.118.110 15:31, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- It's not research, it's criticism, i don't think it needs any citations. It would only need to have a citation if it's a reference to somebody else's criticism/review. It's not so hair-brained that I want it gone. It makes sense if you've read the books. 3:38, April 24 2007
2009
[edit]She is listed on the Yamazaki disambiguation page as a character in this series. There is no information mentioning her on this page. I have put up a request for citation on the disambig. If you have information, please redirect the above link to the appropriate section in this article which mentions her (add if necessary) and remove the tag. Conversely, if you know no such character exists, please remove from Yamazaki. Tyciol (talk) 17:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
2010
[edit]A Cameo
[edit]Didn't the bridge make a cameo in Johnny Mnemonic? I'm pretty sure it did. Can anyone confirm? It annoyed me on some level, but I don't recall why at the time, but looking back I think because the Lo Teks didn't live on the bridge, but high above the sprawl in the geodesic dome.
2011-present
[edit]Article needs review...
[edit]for compliance with WP:VERIFY and WP:OR. There is at least one long-standing [citation needed] tag that has been in place for more than 12 years, and there are a variety of further places where editorial perspective appears—rather than the reporting of facts from published sources.
There's no shortage of William Gibson scholarship and editorial commentary that is third-party and published. As well, the author is very vocal with his perspectives on his novels, and his opinions, generally (much of which is published, and all of which is more germane, substantive, and acceptable than our individual personal opinions on the author's work).
We simply shouldn't be publishing our own interpretations and perspectives in Wikipedia articles. That is contrary to clear WP policies and guidelines. 98.226.86.66 (talk) 19:40, 7 February 2025 (UTC)