Talk:Dreamsnake

message: Is the link to books by other authors necessary?
Paulsen sees this as a cultural tendency typical of patriarchy, and writes that McIntyre's depiction of an ethical need for wholeness and an understanding of connections between the facets of society is also found in the work of Le Guin and in Doris Lessing's Canopus in Argos series.[52]
:Given that the comparison to a specific work is made by a high-quality source, why wouldn't we mention it and link to it? Vanamonde (Talk) 20:16, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to other books necessary? 

message: The article can be cleaned up by removing non core fragments and listing the main themes.  It reads as PHD dissertation by a gushing fan and would benefit from shortening to the main parts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:d591:5f10:bd23:1cd4:27fa:ebb6 (talk • contribs) 
: Featured articles are required to be "comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context; [and] well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature". (CC) Tbhotch™ 06:52, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: As Tbhotch states above, the article is required to be comprehensive, and detailed coverage of scholarly commentary is expected by the featured article criteria, Wikipedia's policy on neutrality, and common sense. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:30, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Shorten 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Dreamsnake. 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:
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5yVVCtt7U?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thehugoawards.org%2Fhugo-history%2F1979-hugo-awards%2F to http://www.thehugoawards.org/hugo-history/1979-hugo-awards/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:09, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Dreamsnake. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thehugoawards.org/hugo-history/1979-hugo-awards/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100806053213/http://www.locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/Locus1979.html to http://www.locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/Locus1979.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100118132016/http://locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/Ditmar1979.html to http://www.locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/Ditmar1979.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:58, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I was surprised to see the front page of Wikipedia claiming that the Cadeuceus is a common symbol of medicine. However, the linked article assert that the Caduceus as a medical symbol is a modern, American phenomenon that is "... a result of documented mistakes, misunderstandings and confusion." This article seems to perpetuate these mistakes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.64.15.101 (talk • contribs) 02:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: As I stated at WT:TFA, fundamentally, this article discusses the Caduceus rather than the more correct Rod of Asclepius, because the reliable sources that this article is based on do so. With respect to your specific concern, though, while it's true that the use of the Caduceus as a symbol of medicine may have been based on a misinterpretation of mythology, that doesn't change the fact that it is so used, and as a result conveys symbolic meaning. Vanamonde (Talk) 02:23, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why claim the Caduceus as a medical symbol? 

message: I've reverted most of the IP edits.  The IP's last edit summary asked for an explanation of what meanings had changed.  One example: The change to the synopsis doesn't give us the narrative through Snake's eyes, but shifts the viewpoint to Stavin's parents, which is not ideal as Snake is the viewpoint character for the novel. Another: the change to the explanation of the use of dream venom no longer says it is the dreaming that relieves the pain, but makes it appear the dreaming and pain relief are independent effects of the venom.  Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 22:10, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. The change you've reinstated, I can live with. The "constitute sections" wording was to address the concern at FAC that the pieces were chapters published as stories, rather than stories which became chapters; I can live with the current wording, but the IP's edit implied they were standalone stories. Of the other edits by the IP that I felt were unhelpful was the wording "McIntyre wrote the "Of Mist, and Grass, and Sand" 1973 short story for it", which isn't directly stated in the source; in fact it's implied she developed the writing assignment into the final story, because it was written at a workshop, after all. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:11, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverted most IP edits 

message: Stats on male vs female readership of sci fi by decade can help. Was the bookseller industry trying to use the ERA & Women’s Lib movement to gain a whole new customer base?  Was this covered in scholarly journals?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:D591:5F10:4968:38A0:F52C:308 (talk) 06:03, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  1970s Expanding Readership Base