Talk:Black Man (novel)

Novels Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 9 June 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved from Black Man to Black Man (novel). The result of the discussion was moved.

Untitled

Is there a reference in support of the claim that "Black Man is set in the same universe as Morgan's Takeshi Kovacs novels"? D.brodale 21:36, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, and in fact if you look at the Richard Morgan article you'll find that it isn't. Martian relics were found by 2089 (c.f. Broken Angels), which is over fifteen years before the events of Black Man. Ewan 19:55, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put that in as I just thought it was obvious. It's set on Earth in an earlier time obviously, Mars is a major part of the plot, altered carbon is mentioned as are the Bancroft family. Virtual reality is used a lot as in the later stories. One character talks about how 'pretty soon' it will be possible to record peoples brain states. As for references, this guy agrees with me: http://sandstormreviews.blogspot.com/2007/03/black-man-richard-morgan.html as does this one: http://www.thegenrefiles.com/2007/03/07/highly-recommended-reading-black-man-by-richard-morgan/ Anyway, take it out if you don't feel it's obvious and/or sourced.

--Shimbo 20:57, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From my reading of the two above-referenced review shorts, I don't gather that Black Man/Thirteen is set in the same fictional universe as the Kovacs works ... the first reviewer merely asserts it, the second openly postulates it to be as such. I can't contest (having not read Morgan's earlier books myself) Ewan's statement as to conflicting timelines or removal of the problematic lines here within the Black Man article. D.brodale 21:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added link to Richard Morgan audio interview where he discusses the book, in particular the part where he talks about the book being in a different universe from the Kovacs books. If someone can format it properly please do so. Also here is another interview, this time in text http://www.uksfbooknews.net/2007/03/19/richard-morgan-on-new-novel-black-man/ Ewan 10:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took out the link Ewan added, because i didn't want to listen to the interview right now; i did check the other one, though, and added it in and formatted it (i think) correctly. Here's Ewan's other link, if you want it. Cheers, Lindsay (talk) 16:43, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, why should whether you want to listen to it influence whether it belongs in the article? -- 128.240.229.7 (talk) 14:07, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

American title

Is there any place on or in the book itself that gives the title as Thirteen and not Th1rte3n? --DocumentN 23:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't own the book (Morgan's other work wasn't to my taste), but FWIW, Amazon's reprint of the publisher's book description says "Thirteen". So do all the reviews it lists. —Cryptic 23:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inconclusive! --DocumentN 23:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The publisher's own site has it in all-letters, too. —Cryptic 23:36, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Number of Pages

I notice on the left hand side of the article it says that the paperback book has 320 pages (atleast that what I'm assuming 320pp means). I just grabbed my copy of the book, which is paperback, and it has 546 pages. I'm not gonna change it but could someone check a paperback copy and see how many pages it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.184.34.216 (talk) 03:57, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

13 vs 13.75

I don't remember any thirteen and three quarters crud, he was just known as a Thirteen or Variant Thirteen, aka unluck in slang. Whoever made that edit should cite it , I don't have the book with me --92.36.239.19 (talk) 17:41, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's correct, as far as I recall — and I've just read it. Pity I didn't read this page beforehand, then I could have made sure. Paul Magnussen (talk) 16:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Crab people ???

I've read all the books and nowhere do I remember any reference to "the invasion of Mars by the subterranean crab people" Lgonggr (talk) 14:46, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 9 June 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 10:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Black Man → Black Man (novel)
Black Man (disambiguation) → Black Man

– Like Black Woman, Black Man should be the disambiguation page. Black Man (novel) exists already as a redirect, not sure why. It's a little bit confusing. RivetHeadCulture (talk) 09:39, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support (strongly) per nom. No primary topic for this term, and if there was, it certainly wouldn't be the novel. Paintspot Infez (talk) 13:59, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per nom. 162 etc. (talk) 15:02, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination, Paintspot Infez and 162 etc. The six-sentence stub for the novel is certainly not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 19:35, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support the novel gets 732 views compared to 458 for the song, 110 for the wrestler and 41,015 for Black people therefore its probably safest to disambiguate per WP:DIFFCAPS. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:19, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:26, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 14:17, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.