Talk:R. Daneel Olivaw

message: Just to let anyone who is listening know - I just posted a link to this in a comment on slashdot, so this page will probably get a half dozen edits in the next couple hours. --Raul654 13:33, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Just to let anyone who is listening know

message: I'm not sure it's a good idea to have Daneel's alter ego names listed in the opening paragraph of the article -- wouldn't those constitute spoilers, since it's supposed to be the big surprise in Prelude to Foundation that Demerzel and Hummin are one and the same, and he's actually Daneel? I'm going to remove the parenthetical "also known as" from the opening sentence, since the alter ego names are listed in bold later in the article (below the spoiler notice). -- Dan Carlson 13:15, Jun 10, 2004 (UTC)
:Dan - yes, I'm inclined to agree. →Raul654 15:11, Jun 10, 2004 (UTC)
Same problem with redirection
I don't know if this is the right place to note this, but I think there's another (major) spoiler due to the fact both Chetter Hummin and Eto Demerzel pages link to Daneel's one.
Even though linking those pages is a good idea, is there any (reasonable) way to prevent users being redirected without any spoiler warning?
→ale_bahgat 12:10, Nov 2, 2005 (UTC)
:I thought so, too, and then I read Talk:Eto_Demerzel. -- Perfecto  01:58, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Also Known As... 

message: I changed this line:
:Daneel invents the Zeroth Law of Robotics after both robots come to see the incompleteness of the existing Laws of Robotics.
To read:
:Giskard invents the Zeroth Law of Robotics after both robots come to see the incompleteness of the existing Laws of Robotics.
From Prelude to Foundation:
:(Daneel speaking to Seldon):
:But I had a . . . friend twenty thousand years ago. It seemed to him that there should be a still more general rule than any of the Three Laws. He called it the Zeroth Law, since zero comes before one.
:The robot who first advanced the Zeroth Law died--became permanently inactive--because he was forced into an action that he felt would save humanity, yet which he could not be sure would save humanity.
This indicates, to me, that Daneel cannot have been the inventor of the Zeroth law. If anyone has better information, please correct me.
Shred -§- 01:51, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Giskard invented the Zeroth Law, did he not? 

message: I have here Robots and Empire. It's the spanish translation, but it's a good one (Plaza & Janés Editorial). I roughly translate (chapter 63):
:(Daneel to Vasilia)
:There is a law that is supperior to the first law. «A robot cannot hurt the human race or, through inaction, allow that the human race being to come to harm.» I consider it now the Zeroth law of Robotics. The first law should say: «A robot may not harm a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm, except where such action would conflict with the Zeroth Law.»
It was Daneel the one who invents the Zeroth law. I suppose Daneel says later that Giskard invented the Zeroth law because it was through their mutual discussion that he was able to state it. Further, if I recall correctly, it was Giskard the one that mentions that something is incomplete in the Three Laws of Robotics, but it was Daneel the one that invented the Zeroth law.
So, I change the line to the original form.
--Canek 22:05, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This is correct. Daneel invented it.--Againme (talk) 16:48, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Except that it's not. Giskard was only able to do what he did because he extrapolated the Zeroth Law for himself and used it to override the First Law. Daneel was only the first to give it a proper wording and perhaps apply it better to himself (not shutting down even with the uncertainty of his plan, even psychohistory wasn't a really that accurate). 193.226.105.89 (talk) 12:05, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daneel invented the Zeroth Law 

message: :Image:ElijahBailey.gif 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 01:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:ElijahBailey.gif

message: The image :Image:The-naked-sun-doubleday-cover.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --10:14, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:The-naked-sun-doubleday-cover.jpg

message: Having just concluded the Aurora trilogy, written by Mark W. Tiedemann, I am left to wonder why such appearances are not a part of this article.  While R. Daneel is not ever named outright, it is made clear in the final pages of the third book in the trilogy, Aurora, that Ariel's assistant, Hofton, is in fact Daneel.  Elements of his overarching work to guide humanity are also part of the resolution to the entire situation.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.34.40.3 (talk) 18:17, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about further appearances in Asimovian fiction? 

message: Although I thought I remembered Daneel being built on Earth, too, there is this bit in Foundation and Earth that I just read:
"Perfectly, sir. I was manufactured, and existed for a time - how brief a time it seems to me, now - on the Spacer world of Aurora." (Kindle location 5220)
Although a bit awkward, that seems to have Daneel saying that he was manufactured on Aurora, not Earth.
Yamki (talk) 14:30, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin 

message: This section has existed for 3 years without a single source and seems almost totally to consist of WP:OR, some of it fairly uncontroversial, but some of it more dubious. My clearing of it was reverted. Please include cites immediately to avoid deletion. Ashmoo (talk) 10:27, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: The Foundation Series

message: Daneel didn't learn that in "Robots and the Empire", he had that capability in "The Caves of Steel". Someone please adjust the main article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.204.73.99 (talk) 21:53, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Cerebroanalysis

message: I read the entire Asmovseries a couple years ago and vaguely recall someone searches out R. Damsel and finds him ‘retired’ on the moon in caverns there, ingeniously hidden.  I was fascinated and wanted to reread it, but alas, I can’t find it.  HELP.  Send to :dcmanning48@gmail.com.  Thanks. 2603:7000:D100:B9F7:98DF:9FCD:8782:3ABA (talk) 19:50, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  R. Daniel Olivaw 

message: This article is 99% WP:FANCRUFTy WP:ALLPLOT summary, with little indicating WP:GNG of the topic. It needs a major rewrite, perhaps even at WP:TNT level - we should focus on discussing the character's reception/significance, based on reliable sources by scholars of literature and sf. Encyclopedias should go beyond plot summaries. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:13, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. I've added sources above. As this robot acts as the connective tissue between Asimov's Robot and Foundation series, and is the only character to appear in both, there's likely more sources to be found. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 00:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability, major rewrite needed