Jump to content

Talk:Daniel Quinn

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

From the article: "While response to Ishmael was mostly very positive, Quinn inspired a great deal of controversy with his claim (most explicitly discussed in the appendix section of The Story of B) that sustained food aid to impoverished nations merely puts off and dramatically worsens a massive population-environment crisis." In fact what is written in the appendix of _The Story of B_ is not exactly this. Quinn addresses the issue of "starving millions" by saying that "There are two things to understand here. The first is that the excess that we produce each year does *not* go to feed the starving millions. ... The second thing is that everyone involved in the problem of world hunger knows that the problem is not a shortage of food. Producing more food does *not* solve the problem because that's simply *not* the problem." (p. 303 _The Story of B_) I suggest it is a magnificent oversimplification to summarize that Quinn supports withdrawal of food aid to impoverished countries. If pointing out the controversy is useful, perhaps a direct quote would be more appropriate. Perhaps, "... the ebb and flow of all populations is a function of food availability. An increase in food availability for a species means growth. A reduction in food availability means decline." (p. 294, _The Story of B_)

Janeb602 (talk) 17:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed a section of this article:"On his website, Quinn states that author Derrick Jensen, who was also involved with the same publisher, was in large part responsible for the difficulty of the bankruptcy proceedings (which delayed publication of Tales of Adam by about 2 years)."

I fail to see how Quinns libelous claims about Derrick Jensen relate to Quinns biography. If this is supposed to be non-biased then it should not only represent Daniel Quinns version of events. Perhaps Derrick disagreed with the company that was going to purchase Context books. Who knows? Who cares? What I do know is that as I have perused wikipedia I have noticed that there are many people here who wish to tear down Derrick Jensens reputation in any way they can. I can only assume that Quinn's own libelous website articles have fueled this misconception of Derrick.

Urban Scout

Does Quinn have source material?

[edit]

Since much of Daniel Quinn's work is fiction, he doesn't cite sources, and my cursory investigation yielded no evidence that he even has source material. While I certainly don't believe that his work can only be valuable if there are "legitimate" scholarly sources for his interesting theories, I do think that for the sake of academic or artistic integrity, we should be clear about it. Daniel Quinn's books present themselves with an air of authority that seems to imply that though they are technically fiction, they are actually non-fiction wrapped in a narrative story. Perhaps the articles on the books themselves would be more appropriate places for this sort of exploration or "disclaimer".

Here he has links to the science http://www.ishmael.org/Education/Science/ GreenCPA in Oregon (talk)GreenCPA in Oregon.

To provide a "for example" from "Ishmael" Daniel Quinn presents an intriguing theory on the origin of the story of the Fall as portrayed in Genesis. Is his theory supported by scholarly research, or are the story's origins established deeper in antiquity? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BenGreen (talk • contribs) 02:56, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is the theory in Genesis supported by scholarly research? This is ancient mythology, not science. He simply interprets the story from a different angle.GreenCPA in Oregon (talk) 05:22, 13 December 2015 (UTC)GreenCPA in Oregon[reply]

I modified the first sentence of his biography to clarify that he attended those three Universities in sequence as part of his work on his bachelor's degree. He did not earn three separate degrees from those institutions. I obtained the information from www.ishmael.org. I also wonder if it may be important to mention the nature and breadth of his professional work prior to his writing career since it provides more context to explain how he came by all the information he has at his disposal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BenGreen (talk • contribs) 03:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He Does provides Source material in the book Beyond Civilization. The book resumes the rationale behind the philosophical ideas of Ishmael, The story of B and My Ishmael and provides a long list of reference to support the various arguments and suggest readings for the continued exploration of themes and controversies. Unfortunately the article for it remains a stub. Stringdom (talk) 22:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm new so won't edit at this time but I have a problem with lots of the information on this page. For example, the page says: "Quinn argues that as the world human population grows, the rest of the living community's biomass is directly injured through extinctions and die-offs." What he says is that the biomass of the planet is essentially finite. Therefore, the increased biomass of humans and human food must come at the expense of the biomass of other species and their foods. Biodiversity is lost through this conversion. In terms of providing a citation, I'm a friend of his and could easily get him to verify this information. Would wiki allow that? 

 GreenCPA in Oregon (talk) 05:22, 13 December 2015 (UTC)GreenCPA in Oregon[reply]

Original Research

[edit]

I added an original research template due to the following paragraph:

"Daniel Quinn offers readers a way out of the dilemma between inattention and blame. It is tough to hold the attention on global problems and still imagine solutions and reasons for hope. Some blame humanity in general, and claim "human nature" necessarily leads to species loss and habitat degradation. In Quinn's writing, one can find a perspective that is pro-sustainability and pro-human, countering the view that humans are inherently toxic to the world."

To me this appears to be an obvious violation of NOR and perhaps even NPOV. Thoughts? --76.190.246.166 (talk) 05:51, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the offending text. If anyone has any objections, please feel free to undo my changes and/or explain why. --76.190.246.166 (talk) 07:23, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Whalen

[edit]

The link to Tom Whalen point to politician and not the writer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.154.104.168 (talk) 06:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Daniel Quinn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:24, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Daniel Quinn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:08, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Quinn has died

[edit]

This was first announced by Rennie Quinn on the page for Daniel Quinn, which is as authoritative as you can get at this point. From the sidebar, you can see Rennie is the sole administrator of the page.

Is Facebook a "reliable source"? It isn't a traditional news source, but as you an see this is as good and as authoritative as you can get with this information: straight from the wife of the deceased herself.

So do you propose we simply ignore this factual information because "it's Facebook"? That seems incredibly naive. But sure, let's wait a few days until someone decide to pick up the story. — LucasVB | Talk 00:24, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. It is kinda a cornerstone of Wikipedia. I would expect someone whose has been here as long as you to know that. All you have to do is fine a source. It can't be that hard. --Majora (talk) 02:33, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Last I checked, we weren't allowed to use Facebook links as sources. This is why this situation seemed unreasonably difficult. — LucasVB | Talk 15:32, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Because there have been edits to this article recently by editors of all account levels and types - and whom are all apparently having trouble complying with Wikipedia's biographies of living people policy and how to locate an acceptable source to cite as proof, I've fully protected the article to enforce compliance. All edits until then will need to be requested and reviewed before being added to the article. Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:54, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

COI

[edit]

@Rms125a@hotmail.com: You have placed a COI template on this page. May I ask why? If you feel there is some conflict of interest, I'd like to take up the mantle of the person who resolves any relevant problems. Thanks. Wolfdog (talk) 03:21, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

::: @Wolfdog -- What article?? Quis separabit? 03:31, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes. This article is clearly in violation of COI due to the tenor and textual exegeses of the article. I do not question the intentions and the hard work put into the article but the result does not, IMO, appear to comply with WP:NEUTRAL. Yours, Quis separabit? 03:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Rms125a@hotmail.com: Why don't you go ahead and give me some specific phrases or paragraphs you think need work, so I can get down to some practical changes. Thanks. Wolfdog (talk) 10:42, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone ahead and added citations to all the uncited material you tagged. Does that help? Wolfdog (talk) 13:08, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Wolfdog -- I think it is good now. Yours, Quis separabit? 00:03, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Daniel_Quinn&oldid=1198799741"