Talk:Instrumentality of Mankind

message: Whole page seems to be original research. No sources, lots of assertions and speculations.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.178.50.46 (talk) 02:28, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a big quote sourced to the short story "Drunkboat".  Most of the info in the "Origin and history" and "Individual members subsections is fairly obvious if you've read the Cordwainer Smith stories... AnonMoos (talk) 04:05, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  My comment applies particularly to the section on possible sources of inspiration, which is totally unsourced, completely speculative, an an excellent example of original research. Glad you read all of Mr. Linebarger's stories so carefully and thought about them so much. You should publish a book. Then you can use yourself as a source, more-or-less legitimately. Don't forget your daily devotional reading of Smith Wigglesworth, but seriously, Moos, the fact that they both use the term "instrumentality" proves absolutely nothing and in any case you'd have to find a published source asserting the connection if there were one. Sorry to disappoint you. Clearly you want to bring your theological beliefs into the picture but it just won't fit and it wouldn't matter if it did if it all comes out of your own head. Ciao, and don't forget to put the cat out. If you're strong enough to deal with the separation, that is.68.178.50.46 (talk) 00:17, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't write the "Possible sources of inspiration" section, and it doesn't reflect my "theological beliefs" (which you mostly have no way of knowing), and I don't care too much whether that subsection is deleted... AnonMoos (talk) 03:21, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

text: There's a big quote sourced to the short story "Drunkboat". Most of the info in the "Origin and history" and "Individual members subsections is fairly obvious if you've read the Cordwainer Smith stories... AnonMoos (talk) 04:05, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  OR 

message: Still no sources for anything, entire article seems to be original research at best, and opinion, at most (e.g. no references in the "influences" bits, and the whole first/old bit of this duscission-page in itself certainly seems to throw the entire article into question...). Total rewrite or deletion, I find. 82.196.109.58 (talk) 04:26, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a big quote sourced to the short story "Drunkboat". Most of the info in the "Origin and history" and "Individual members subsections is fairly obvious if you've read the Cordwainer Smith stories... AnonMoos (talk) 04:05, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: 2019

message: In addition to the WP:OR issues above, this article seems to have issues meeting WP:GNG. What reliable sources discuss this topic in detail? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:13, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Answering myself: a review of sources in GScholar suggests the topic (book series/fictional universe) is likely notable. The problem is this article originated in the early days of Wikipedia, was WP:ORish and still is. Someone needs to rewrite it with reliable sources that go beyond plot summary and ORish speculations. PS. While I think the topic is likely notable, the current mess of an article does little to show this to the reader, and the tag should remain until this is addressed. OR tag is probably not warranted since most of the content is a plot summary, outside of the cultural references section which indeed needs citations or removal as OR. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:21, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability?