Talk:List of biopunk works

Suggestions for works to add to Biopunk

Books

I think Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake and The Year of the Flood should probably be considered biopunk (even though she is not specifically a biopunk author). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.19.138 (talk) 14:09, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Movies

Repo!

Would Repo! The Genetic Opera count as biopunk? I just saw the movie version tonight and it had a very cyberpunk feeling, but more on the organ transplant and repossession scale. Also there is the angle about the huge evil corporation. 99.240.191.134 (talk) 04:20, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it is but we need a reliable source that actually says Repo! The Genetic Opera is biopunk before we can mention in the Biopunk article. If you find one, let us know. --Loremaster (talk) 15:39, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

not sure how many sources there are going to be, but i know Repo! is already listed under cyberpunk even though it has far far less to do with it than it does with Biopunk... at some point obvious calls should just be made. otherwise people who are less stringent about definitions are gonna lump them all into cyberpunk. like Judge Dredd for instance, just cause it's in the future doesn't mean it's cyberpunk... i'm not gonna say i'm an expert but i'm sure there's people around this article who are qualified enough on the odd subject to make the claim even if the author or crew never directly said it.Cpesacreta (talk) 03:37, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth — what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. That being said, I may have found one but it probably isn't reliable and I think it based on a previous version of this article!: Genome Alberta: What is Biopunk?. --Loremaster (talk) 06:42, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Crimes_of_the_Future_(2022_film)

This is a new concept to me, but reading the biopunk article, David Cronenberg's latest film immediately came to mind. In the movie there's a), a decaying environment all around (suggesting an economic downturn) and societal friction between the government and malcontents, and b), all sorts of technology that interfaces with human bodies directly. Both of these elements spell biopunk to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gdzlg (talk • contribs) 07:45, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Tokyo Gore Police

What with the movie revolving around the actions group of constantly mutating and evolving murderers, the Engineers (genetically engineered serial killers and murderers), and the task force created to hunt them, it seems a pretty solid fit for Biopunk. I've looked and haven't found any direct mention of the movie being intentionally biopunk in reviews or interviews, but it also seems like no one is asking if that's what they'd consider it. also, i'm not spending hours delving through old articles. Cpesacreta (talk) 04:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

If you can't find at least one reliable source that describes Tokyo Gore Police as biopunk, we should not mention it in the article until we do find one. --Loremaster (talk) 06:44, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Video Games

Evolva

why nobody mentioned evolva? (Idot (talk) 01:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC))

Do you have a reliable source (author stated, review, article - no blogs) that notes Evolva as being "biopunk"? Your personal opinion or simple obviousness doesn't count. --Loremaster (talk) 02:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, there's also a Blizzard game where you get to use organic-based technology to build an army, bases, power, etc. I forgot what it was called, though. Dessydes (talk) 10:35, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

So what? --Loremaster (talk) 09:00, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

TV Shows

I would say that Fringe_(TV_series) would count. Dr. Bishop = biohacker. I will see if I can find a specific example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.52.232.87 (talk) 13:29, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

We still need a reliable source that explicitly states that Fringe is biopunk. --Loremaster (talk) 14:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Inclusion criteria

To include an item on a list like this there should be reliable sources indicating work A is considered genre B (biopunk) without requiring original research (i.e. "I noticed biopunk elements in this movie" or "I just know this video game is biopunk"). The secondary issue is notability, which is a typical requirement for non-exhaustive lists per the common selection criteria. I'd like to build out this list a bit, including those in the categories which include reliable sources, but that'll also probably mean removing some. Thoughts? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:44, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Well I think this list is both exceptionally short and well referenced (esp. when compared to similar wiki-lists). The only section that seems to be relevant to trimming is the video games section - but I'd rather suggest placing some warning/info box on top of that section instead of basically removing it completely. Imo the list rather needs some more entries (and at some point having the comments gotten out of the article and onto the talk page) - and I would be glad if you could help out with that. --Fixuture (talk) 20:49, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of biopunk works. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.locusmag.com/2005/Features/01
• Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/69z8WoK50?url=http://genomealberta.ca/blogs/main_08180801.aspx to http://www.genomealberta.ca/blogs/main_08180801.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:53, 29 December 2017 (UTC)