Talk:Connie Willis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fixed[edit]

November 7, 2005 fixed a typo: 'custons' replaced with 'customs'.

Harlequin Romance[edit]

She also wrote a Harlequin Romance -it was wonderful. Sorry I don't have the title/plot line. - Anonymous comment added 21 April 2006, by 70.69.252.2

Well, I've never heard of this, and I can't find any reference to it on the web. Unless someone supplies details, this is an unsubstantiated rumor that can't be mentioned in the article. - Lawrence King 06:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, this makes a lot of sense. Keep looking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.27.213 (talk) 20:44, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two issues[edit]

A. While this article is very well-written (as a review) and I agree with much of it and find it interesting, it seems a bit non-encyclopedic and a bit too (positively) judgmental of literary quality. Especially these two paras:

Willis is acclaimed as a science-fiction writer, most often exploring the "soft" or social sciences. She subtly and skillfully weaves technology into her stories only to prompt readers to question what impact it has on the world. For instance, Lincoln's Dreams plumbs not just the psychology of dreams, but also their role as indicators of disease. The story portrays a young man's unrequited love for a young woman who might or might not be experiencing reincarnation or precognition, and whose outlook verges on suicidal. Similarly Bellwether is almost exclusively concerned with human psychology.

Among other themes, Uncharted Territory contemplates the extent to which technology shapes expectations of gender; "technology" here, by the way, ranges from a land rover and binoculars to Bult's online "chopping" and the pop-up holograms--even socioexozoology. Remake embraces old movies and the computer graphics revolution, as well as intellectual property, digital copyright issues, and the question of public domain. Willis is a master at evoking nostalgia and then wryly poking fun at it. She doesn't shy away from the tough questions: are we sacrificing any of our humanity in adopting and adapting to technological advancement, and if so, can that be termed progress?

B. Article needs a bit more on her short stories, given how renowned they are. For instance, Winnebago.TCO 23:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The "soft" and "only" parts aren't necessary at all, and are fairly derogatory (not to mention presuming how readers are supposed to interpret her writing). I'm removing them, as they don't add anything to her biography and simply indicate bias. -98.149.25.150 (talk) 23:35, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

novels vs. short fiction[edit]

Some novellas and novelettes are being included under both novels & short fiction. I'm moving everything Connie Willis's site describes as a novel into the novel section. Kea2 (talk) 14:23, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ado[edit]

Are "Ado (1988)" and "Much Ado About [Censored] (1991)" actually the same? Seems likely. AnonMoos (talk) 14:00, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One issue[edit]

It says she went to The University of Northern Colorado, but in my time there we never refereed to it as Colorado State University-that would be the school up the road. I could get behind saying she went to the school of Normal, but really that was in the 1920s... can we get that reworded? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.145.29.58 (talk) 23:01, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the problem is...nowhere in the article does it say "Colorado State University", and the University of Northern Colorado article states that it was called "Colorado State College" from 1957 to 1970, which is when she was attending. Is there something I'm missing? Princess Lirin (talk) 01:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah looking it over I don't think it is that big of an issue, It's just that when most people from Colorado see Colorado State- they think of CSU in Fort Collins. I know when she went to UNC it was Called Colorado State College- but I may be the only one who jumps to the other school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.145.29.58 (talk) 16:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Writing style[edit]

The Writing Style section contains no sources for any of the claims made. Surely, someone with a career as long as hers would have some reliable commentary. Ashmoo (talk) 13:23, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Harlan Ellison incident.[edit]

Do we really need so much, or indeed anything at all, on the Harlan Ellison incident? Especially considering that all the quoted sources are from Ellison and not from Willis, and largely he's talking about himself.

It seems an insignificant event in her life but merely the sort of minor real life incident that becomes overblown internet drama more suited to Reddit than WP.

I vote for deleting that section. Verlaine76 (talk) 08:27, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree wholeheartedly, and have deleted it. Princess Lirin (talk) 03:32, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Connie Willis. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 19:29, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography[edit]

I have commenced a tidy-up of the Bibliography section using cite templates. Capitalization and punctuation follow standard cataloguing rules in AACR2 and RDA, as much as Wikipedia templates allow it. ISBNs and other persistent identifiers, where available, are commented out, but still available for reference. Feel free to continue. Sunwin1960 (talk) 11:44, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently (judging by the ToC of * Time is the Fire: The Best of Connie Willis at Amazon compared to the ToC of The Best of Connie Willis: Award-winning Stories ( Ballantine, 2013)), the book was published with two different titles with the only difference being an additional introduction in Time Is the Fire. Kdammers (talk) 22:29, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Connie Willis. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 06:43, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Awards table[edit]

I have started converting the awards section to a table format (similar to the Lois McMaster Bujold article) that I believe improves clarity. I'm done with novels and novellas so far. Let me know if I missed or left out any info. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 02:54, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article's structure and links[edit]

At least some of the books are blue-linked, but the ones I looked at simply circled back to this article with no additional content on the books -- simply the blue link I clicked on. This needs to be fixed. Kdammers (talk) 22:32, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Any circular wikilinks should be removed, feel free to do so. Schazjmd (talk) 22:51, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cleaned up. Dan Bloch (talk) 03:42, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2006 Hugo Awards ceremony controversy[edit]

I don't think it belongs in this article. The controversy was real, but it was really about Harlan Ellison, and belongs in his article (which has the identical text to here). StAnselm (talk) 13:52, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. This fails WP:BALASP for Willis. Dan Bloch (talk) 15:55, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Connie_Willis&oldid=1207289277"