Talk:Foundation series

Encyclopedia Galactica

I think I was looking for a discussion about how Wikipedia IS the Encyclopedia Galactica. Could/Would anyone from W confirm?

New Asimov/Foundation wiki

The articles on the Foundation Unviverse are outstanding, they cover a great deal of content. However, it seems Wikipedia makes cataloging and joining the Foundation Universe articles a little difficult. So I've found and revamped a Foundation/Asimov wiki on wikicities. Contributors to and readers of the Foundation Universe articles are more than welcome to expand on it, as right now it is basically an empty shell. It can be found here: [1].

West Wing reference highly dubious

Removed - this character is nowhere close to a popular culture reference

In The West Wing episode , Janel Maloney's character Donatella Moss leads a discussion of office assistants regarding the impending release of their salary information by the opposition party instructing her coworkers to respond respectfully and not complain to the media about their pay. Bradley Whitford's character (Moss's supervisor) greets her after the discussion by calling her "Jo-jo," a reference to Jo-Jo Joranum, a democratic activist in Forward the Foundation.

Impact in non-fiction - Martin Seligman - bad reference

Reference 9 provides no link to justify the claim that Martin Seligman successfully predicted the 1988 US elections. Seligmans wikipedia page makes no reference to this claim, or his predictions. Searching online for similar claims, i found this page [2] which, in its first paragraph, indicates that the predictions were based on which candidate was more positive in their speeches, etc. This is a far cry from psychohistory. I'd recommend that the claim be removed from the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.89.4.226 (talk) 02:14, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Seligman specifically states (p.204), "We try to predict the actions of large groups--the votes of an electorate, the emigration of a people." He also emphasizes that he is using techniques to predict, not merely postdict, as previous "psycohistory" studies had done. That he used blunter instruments (like political speech vocabulary) to measure the predictors than Hari Seldon is not important to his claim. Jmacwiki (talk) 21:42, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Cliodynamics

Is the comparison of cliodynamics and psychohistory mentioned in the sources ? As cliodynamics was devised much later, I don't think that paragraph belongs there in the article.

Two of the references there are shown as sfns to Turchin 2008 and Turchin 2015 - but nowhere are the full details of those given. -- Beardo (talk) 16:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Removed it. It is in no way relevant to that section. Cliodynamics is mentioned in the article for Psychohistory, and that seems sufficient. Shilton (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Splitting the article

What was the need to split this article into two articles? It was fine as it was. Richard75 (talk) 00:44, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

• I agree with Richard75. This shouldn't have been split. The split has resulted in an article that largely violates Wikipedia policies, since it is overwhelmingly WP:WEIGHTed towards WP:PRIMARY research. Shooterwalker (talk) 00:04, 10 January 2022 (UTC)