This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
I've just patched up the references in the recently-added "Technology" section. The section is entirely referenced to primary sources, which doesn't seem appropriate for a Featured Article – perhaps an editor with a good overview of the secondary literature on Vonnegut could review whether including such a section is appropriate or not and if so how it should be sourced? Best, Wham2001 (talk) 11:06, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some secondary literature on the theme, and would be happy to add additional sources as needed. If editors think it works better as a section under "themes," that would make sense, but given his prominence as a technological critic, some acknowledgement of that theme or his views on technology seems appropriate. Ukerist (talk) 17:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article mentions Vonnegut threatening to sue Brown & Williamson in a 2006 Rolling Stone interview. However, he had already made the same statement in A Man Without a Country, published in 2005. And of course the threat was tongue-in-cheek, as he was supposedly going to sue them over their cigarettes' failure to kill him as promised. 2601:642:C201:210:7794:40BA:B6CE:7EEB (talk) 20:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is pretty obvious the remakr was sarcastic. As to the timing, I don't believe I have a copy of that particular book, if you can provide details, ISBN number and page number specifically, I think it could be changed to reflect that he said it earlier. Just Step Sidewaysfrom this world ..... today20:21, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, maybe it's me, non native speaker, but isn't something off in "At the time of his death, he had written fourteen novels, three short-story collections, five plays, and five nonfiction books. A book composed of his unpublished pieces, Armageddon in Retrospect, was compiled and posthumously published..."? Say that he wrote three works, A,B and C, of which the first two, A and B were published in his lifetime and C posthumously. I would contend that at the time of his death, KV had _published_ A and B, but also _written_ C already before he died. So the word "written" in the quote should, I feel, be "published" (or can you say "he'd had published" in EN ...?), so as not to imply that someone else wrote the posthumous works. Super nitpick, I guess, and probably wrong, but .... it just grated a little. T 2A02:FE1:E16B:CC00:589C:28EB:3E9:F20F (talk) 23:18, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
