Talk:Michael Talbot (author)

Per talk page guidelines Layout, please post new topics at the bottom.

Start new topics with a "section heading", on a separate line, start and end the line with ==

comments

Holographic Universe needs a separate article..

• I agree 125.203.94.19 18:45, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
• Me too. – T.O. Rainy Day —Preceding unsigned comment added by T.O. Rainy Day (talk • contribs) 06:50, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
• The powers at Wikipedia dont —Preceding unsigned comment added by H0riz0n (talk • contribs) 14:42, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
• Screw Wikipedia made a separate article here —Preceding unsigned comment added by H0riz0n (talk • contribs) 02:53, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

notability

• As usual, I'm befuddled by a wikipedia editor's decision. Michael Talbot is not a notable person? A famous author in the field of science? Please. What are you afraid of -- you're going to run out of paper? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.238.209.10 (talk) 23:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• Dear wiki people, please I beg you, take off that box about notability! I have never commented on any article, but Talbot, and his book Holographic Universe, were TREMENDOUSLY influential at a pivotal moment in the history of consciousness studies, the new age moment, brain-mind theory, neurotheology, and related fields. I'm sorry that I don't have time to provide references or rewrite the article simply to persuade wikipedia to remove that sign. Let me just say that it is very discouraging as a researcher to come back after all these years and find Talbot, a seminal figure and popularizer of the field if there ever was one, with this nugatory box below his name. Please, please, please think twice before dismissing the legacy of such a truly notable figure. Sorry to make such a fuss, but Talbot was a great inspiration to me and several of my colleagues, though I never met him or anything to do with him. Alas, I wish I could joke about it like the above commenter, but it's just too distressing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.21.3 (talk) 06:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I've checked and don't see any question about notability. His book is published by Harper, and has a respectable sales ranking on Amazon. I'm removing the notability template. --Parsifal _Hello 06:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProjects?

Why is this page part of WikiProjects: Australia? Asymptosis (talk) 03:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Two Questions

This is all very interesting. What I wanted to ask in regard to this article is:

1) What was Talbot's own relationship to science. Was he a scientist himself?

2) How does the science world view his claims?

These two things are not dealt with in the article and it would be very helpful if they were.

ThePeg (talk) 22:07, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

1) Why is he notable.

2) Why are there no references in the article? Simonm223 (talk) 19:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Holographic Universe search go to Holographic principle

• Why does Holographic Universe search -- go to Holographic principle?(H0riz0n (talk) 14:48, 29 September 2009 (UTC)).

Because it's a more general topic which may be referred to by that name. If someone was looking for the book, they would search for The Holographic Universe. Correct disambiguation is in place. Danski14^(talk) 23:34, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was - Not moved and DAB page created. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:44, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Michael Coleman Talbot → Michael Talbot — Page was originally created on 26 May 2005 On 21 May 2009 (User talk:Galassi moved it and wrote a new article. This has caused linked all over the web to point to the wrong location. It is easier to correct the inappropriate move than have 1000's of webpages changed their link. Galassi should not have originally been moved it with out consensus and discussion. I only happened to come across this and could not find the original Michael Talbot while testing a link of mine. Do a Google search and you will see that 1. his wiki doesnt show up and 2. he is more predominately known and no one knows him by his obscure middle name that he did not use--do a search on Michael Coleman Talbot. H0riz0n (talk) 16:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Disagree with Move There is no indication that this Michael Talbot is notable. The Michael Talbot currently at that name does appear to meet WP:GNG. Simonm223 (talk) 19:16, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

DAB page better: change Michael Talbot to Michael Talbot (musicologist) and turn the former page into a disambiguation page. Put DAB header on this page. Jubilee♫clipman 21:13, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

• Comment: I agree that neither is particularly more notable that the other. Therefore neither name is "primary". Jubilee♫clipman 21:17, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

• More comment: The Google search shows up both of these persons and one John Michael Talbot. DAB definately better. Jubilee♫clipman 21:22, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

• Comment The available references in the articles suggest the musicologist is more notable than the occultist. However the pseudo DAB at the top of the musicologist page is long enough that I agree a proper DAB might be a valid solution. Simonm223 (talk) 21:25, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

I moved it in accordance with more usual disambig practice to Michael Talbot (author) - this meets the objections of those who disagreed above (as it makes no judgement over whether one is more notable than the other) and those who wished it moved (who said the middle name was not used extensively by the author and was not necessary). Orderinchaos 03:05, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Why was there ever a discussion about deletion of this article

Why was there ever a discussion about deletion of the article about Michael Coleman Talbot?

Probably his most important book, "The Holographic Universe" was also up for deletion. To my opinion it is one of the most important scientific books written in the last few decades. Recent scientific research done in Hannover, Germany supports his ideas. [1]

I think it s a bit fishy why these articles were up for deletion, just as fishy as his early death was (only a year after "the Holographic Universe" was published). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.146.76.10 (talk) 00:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Why is the title in italics?

I don't know if it looks like this to anyone else, but to me, this article appears to be under the title 'Michael Talbot (author)' (instead of 'Michael Talbot (author)'). Looking at the source, I can't work out why this is. Can anyone provide an explanation? Robofish (talk) 22:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not why it's in italics either, but it happened during this edit. --Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 22:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

The article "The Universe as a Hologram

I tis my understanding after being in direct contact with the author, that this article so often attributed to Michael Talbot himself, was actually written by one Denis Jones, currently living in France. You can find the article on his webpage. I told me he wrote it and never bothered to correct others when they credited it to Talbot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.155.188.57 (talk) 16:18, 25 April 2011 (UTC)