Talk:"Repent, Harlequin!" Said the Ticktockman

message: Doesn't this story seem a bit anti-communist? I think he may have negatively referred to it as "the unified driving force". Please correct me if I am wrong.
Also aren't there some references to 'Alice In Wonderland'? Like the protagonists' wife/girlfriend called Alice; he uses the word 'jabberwocky'; the story is ridiculous with insane undertones typical of 'Alice In Wonderland'. I don't know; help me out here.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.40.179.66 (talk • contribs) 17:07, 7 February 2006.
:Then, please, contribute to the article, expanding it! :) Rudá 17:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't this story seem a bit anti-communist?  Ellison's politics have generally been anti-authoritarian and anti-totalitarian.  Communism has no monopoly either on totalitarianism or on Ellison's disgust.IanThal 14:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Considerations 

message: What's a "Jellybean" paragraph?
:A paragraph about jellybeans. --Kizor 21:31, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The jellybean paragraph also got him comments at the 1966 WorldCon in Cleveland where Ellison got his (first) Hugo.  However, this page is not the place to tell the ballistic jellybeans story.  Wyvern 11:22, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *High-fives self* --Kizor 01:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That jellybean sentence/paragraph isn't grammatically a run-on. It's long, but it has one subject ("Millions and billions . . ."), one finite verb ("fell"), and a string of gerundives describing how the jellybeans fell ("tinkling . . . bouncing . . . rolling . . . coming . . . entering"). It has a lot of adjectives, but it is a grammatically correct simple sentence.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.157.94.254 (talk) 16:31, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree. It is not a run-on sentence. I will change the article's reference to it. Quinnov (talk) 22:46, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  In fact, I'm just going to delete that sentence altogether. It is a good idea, but it is factually incorrect, not really backed by anything, and seems out of place in the introduction right now. If someone has some more information about his ignorance of stylistic suggestions, then feel free to add it back. Quinnov (talk) 22:49, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "jellybean" 

message: ... wrote a similar story for Playboy, I understand. Anyone able to confirm this? - Ta bu shi da yu 15:53, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes - here's a link: http://mandrake-comics.blogspot.com/2009_02_01_archive.html130.64.189.127 (talk) 17:11, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lee Falk... 

message: :Image:Galaxy December 1965.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 18:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Galaxy December 1965.jpg

message: I don't know if this (http://www.enotes.com/repent-harlequin) is considered a good source or not, but for what it's worth, that source syas >160 times. Kdammers (talk) 01:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re:  One of the most frequently... 

message: HE has often been embroiled in open conflicts.  Currently, he is trying to block the release of a movie (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/theticket/2011/0923/1224304570593.html, http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/sep/16/harlan-ellison-justin-timberlake-movie, http://www.tgdaily.com/entertainment/58556-dystopian-in-time-faces-legal-trouble).  Apparently, he authorized some-one else to write a film-script for the story (http://scriptshadow.blogspot.com/2011/03/repent-harlequin-said-ticktockman.html).  I think this warrants a small mention. Kdammers (talk) 01:25, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movie Controversy