Talk:R'lyeh

message: i used this script to find the distance. should i enter it in the article?
http://www.movable-type.co.uk/scripts/latlong.html
it is 329.7 km  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.238.225 (talk) 01:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I would personally say no.  I don't think it is a significant enough note; maybe if some writer had made an issue or whatnot of it, but this is treading the waters of original research perhaps.  Still, nifty. --Human.v2.0 (talk) 19:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  distance between derleth r'lyeh and lovecraft r'lyeh 

message: The doom metal band Catacombs and it's reference to it.
http://www.metal-archives.com/release.php?id=99037
Gorillaz, the fictional band’s coordinates of Plastic Beach being directly (I think it’s directly above, im not sure) R’lyeh.
(Can’t find a link, so just search it on the Fandom Gorillaz Wiki [Plastic Beach, location] is what you need to search to find it.) Stupidrobot171 (talk) 09:52, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  References to R'lyeh 

message: The following from the References section are references to Cthulhu, not R'lyeh:
* Metallica's "The Call Of Ktulu" off of Ride The Lightning is a tribute to Lovecraft's story. See [1]
* The Vision Bleak song "Kutulu!" * Carpathia - A Dramatic Poem is also a tribute to Lovecraft's story. See [2]
Miraculouschaos 00:07, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, they should be moved to the Chtulhu article. This reference too:
*In the book, the story says that mentioning the name Cthulhu (Verbally or written) will bring him closer. That's why Metallica used the name "Ktulu" and not "Cthulhu" - for fear of the beast.~ www.songfacts.com
189.15.220.112 (talk) 01:42, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: References to Cthulhu, not R'lyeh

message: Can we have some reference to how to pronounce this name? I've heard it pronounced all sorts of ways,. 20.142.32.68 22:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The most common one I've heard is [r@"laI.Eh] (ruh-LYE-eh) or [r@"laI.Ex] (ruh-LYE-ekh) but I've also heard ["Er.ljEh] (ER-lyeh). Lovecraft was no Tolkien, though, and it's not clear that his spellings reflected any kind of consistent phonology. --FOo 08:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation

message: "Interestingly, in 1997 US Navy operators recorded an ultra low frequency "bloop" near the same coordinates described by Lovecraft.[2]" The "bloop" is said on that link to be on coordinates 100ºW 50ºS. There is a 26 degree longitudinal gap. This is in no way "near", it's several hundred miles away. Mordac
:O R'lyeh? (Sorry) Seriously though, good work noticing that.--142.165.186.154 20:35, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bloop

message: Would it be possible to expand on this subject? It seems to be somewhat glossed over... — SheeEttin {T/C} 04:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, not really. - Dotdotdotdash (talk) 02:33, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Lovecraft had a gift for using adjectives when he didn't actually have anything to say.  His vague description is the best we've got, I fear.--otherlleft 21:47, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

text: I think Robert Weinberg is an idiot and his reference should be removed. We can't actually build in another dimension? Next he's gonna write a book about how old Gods and magic don't actually exist. Gee thanks. Ever heard of the suspension of disbelief? It's bloody science fiction. What a waste.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.92.114.177 (talk) 17:51, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

text: The mention is there to offer a valid counterpoint, and helps build an encyclopedia standard article. But then, I'm talking to myself, aren't I? Another random drive-by comment offered by someone who couldn't even be bothered signing in. Oh well. 
PurpleHeartEditor (talk) 03:00, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

text: Read CoC last night. It did not occur to me that Lovecraft was suggesting the architecture was actually "non-Euclidean" ... just that it appeared disorienting because it did not follow basic norms or contemporary architecture, or may have explored optical illusions, which are very real, and very subtle, and actually fairly common in monolithic architecture old and new. --72.173.160.58 (talk) 01:42, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

text: PS: I decided to just remove that bit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=R%27lyeh&action=historysubmit&diff=453813232&oldid=451442784) ... I will probably remove the non-Euclidean reference next for consistency. --12.213.80.55 (talk) 01:48, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: My assumption was simply that there was an ungodly amount of curves and spherical shapes involved, with the buildings being much more sphere-based, rather than the oblong buildings we're all used to seeing. GRAPPLE X 01:49, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-Euclidean Architecture 

message: Sorry, but what does that have to do with this article?  Shouldn't that be deleted?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.168.152.68 (talk) 19:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why the part on the bloop?

message: This is fairly straightforward - corrected colloquial language, removed unsourced statements and threaded ideas together (with references to the short story) in a logical and cohesive flow. References to the same text accurately cited and original research claim (someone listening to a CD) removed. A quick glance at the infobox alone should have indicated that there were changes needed. Other material can be added, but it must be sourced and gel with the rest of the text, which was previously a clunky collection of facts and trivia. PurpleHeartEditor (talk) 02:25, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes