Talk:Kurt Vonnegut/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Influenced - Douglas Adams

I removed Douglas Adams from the influenced list, because I see no way that he could be, and there is no citation. 1) Douglas Adams was nearly the same exact age as Vonnegut and much of his work was published around the same time, 2) Douglas Adams' humor was Brittish, where as Vonnegut's is American. Adams used humor in an uplifting funny way, where as Vonnegut's humor was bleak, black comedy, and was quite different from Adams.

The only reason I see that Adams was listed as being influenced by Vonnegut was because 1) They both employed humor, 2) Adams is a science-fiction writer and much of Vonnegut's work had a Sci-Fi lean/bent towards it.

Thus why I removed Adams from being influenced by Vonnegut. The Rypcord. 16:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Your point two is wildly off the mark. Vonnegut was born in 1922, Adams in 1952. Vonnegut's first novel was in 1952 (the same year Adams was born) and two of Vonnegut's best known novels were published in 1963 and 1969. Adams' first novel was published in 1979. These are things that are easily verified in their respective articles. So, there is no logical reason that Vonnegut could not have influenced Adams.

Furthermore, there are possible references to the connection between Adams and Vonnegut: I've pulled the following up in literally 30 seconds.

So who did he read with relish, in these formative, creative years? And what made an author special for him? He could almost have been describing his own work as he paid his spontaneous tribute to the effortless, fertile genius of Kurt Vonnegut.

"Tom Stoppard. Otherwise, Tolstoy I love. Solzhenitsyn. Kurt Vonnegut, who I think is absolutely superb. I've read The Sirens of Titan six times now, and it gets better every time. He is an influence, I must own up. Sirens of Titan is just one of those books – you read it through the first time and you think it's very loosely, casually written. You think the fact that everything suddenly makes such good sense at the end is almost accidental. And then you read it a few more times, simultaneously finding out more about writing yourself, and you realise what an absolute tour de force it was, making something as beautifully honed as that appear so casual."

[1]. This appears to be a reliable source in that it is a direct quote from an interview with Adams. Based on this, I have reinstated that Vonnegut influenced Adams (I don't think it gets any clearer than "He is an influence") along with this reference. Edhubbard 21:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

ps: They were also both avowed atheists. Edhubbard 21:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Edhubbard 21:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

There's a bit of vandalism on this page, please revert —Preceding unsigned comment added by TehNomad (talk • contribs) 23:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

This article is overly long and poorly organized

Much of the writing on this page consists of very subjective critiques and summaries. Some of these are general and some very specific, but most are perhaps out-of-bounds in terms of what goes into an encyclopedia. Some exposition and examination of Vonnegut's life and work is appropriate, but currently there is no sense of organization or authority. Would someone with more experience and a better knowledge of Vonnegut than I please bring this issue to her attention? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.130.29.0 (talk) 18:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The Early Years section makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.Mindian (talk) 14:41, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Slaughterhouse-Five (book) Cameo

Doesn't Billy Pilgrim meet Vonnegut in the Slaughterhouse-Five book or something? If so, can we add it to the cameo section? Sorry if the request has been raised before. Ryan4314 (talk) 00:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

You may be getting mixed up with 'Breakfast of Champions'. At the end of that Book Kilgor Trout meets with K.V. In 'Happy Birthday Wanda June' K.V. also appears. I think he also appears in 'Between Time and Timbuktu'.Johnwrd (talk) 03:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Vonnegut 'sort of' appears in Slaugherhouse 5. There's a scene in which Billy Pilgrim overhears an American in the latrine saying something to the effect that he's excreted everything but his brains. They don't actually meet, IIRC. Sorry, I don't have the novel in front of me, and it would take forever to find the passage anyway. In any case, it probably doesn't belong in the Cameos section, as the rest of the cameos involve KV portraying himself in film or TV. Statyk (talk) 20:00, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

New Posthumous Collection

Should we add mention of the collection of Vonnegut's works, Armageddon in Retrospect, that is due out April 1 (without any trace of irony for the date choice)? [2] Of course, it should go on the complete list of his works, but should it also be added here? I don't know much about it yet, except that it exists. Edhubbard (talk) 18:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

2BRO2B

There is a mistake in "It will be a collection of short stories never before published, including 2BRO2B, and many more." 2BRO2B was published in The Wizards of Odd in 1996. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LenkaSt (talk • contribs) 10:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Move Proposal

Mr. Vonnegut's name is given as "Kurt Vonnegut, Jr." at the head of this article. I propose that this article be moved to Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. Any objections?

Webbbbbbber (talk) 21:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I object. Kurt Vonnegut, Sr. is not notable by Wikipedia standards, and does not have his own article. Hence, there is no need to disambiguate between Vonnegut and his father. Vonnegut dropped the "Jr." from his name after his father died, and that is the name used on most, if not all, of his publications. Nick Graves (talk) 00:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Vonnegut did not drop the "Jr." from his name until the 1980s--after the publication of Breakfast of Champions, the cover of which clearly shows his by-line as "Kurt Vonnegut, Jr."72.85.48.36 (talk) 20:18, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Kurt Vonnegut Jr. dropped the Jr. when his father Kurt Vonnegut Sr. passed away ie. died. This I am 97.3% sure is correct. My source is Kilgor Trout who crashed on my couch, temporarily, after the death of Kurt. This really happened, which eludes to power of Vonnegut's writing, and the abbility of transcendental experience among those readers who came to him by way of Tralfamador.beny (talk) 21:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Too many links to articles

Is it just me, or does this article have too many links to other wikipedia articles? I removed the one to cockroaches, but there are many many more to things that have nothing to do with Kurt Vonnegut. I think that goes against wikipedia's standards. If the readers do not know what cockroaches are, they can find the article themselves later. There are more, linking to suicide, pneumonia, biochemistry, frostbite, public relations, divorce, cancer, psychotic, saint, traumatic, brain injuries, time travel, molecules, melting point, Playboy, excerpt, posthumously, 2004, chimpanzees, race, short story, the Grand Canyon, cameo, rumor, and commencement speech. Not one of these has anything important about Kurt Vonnegut. I vote we delete all these links to articles. ForgetfulDoryFish (talk) 10:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Pop Culture?

What exactly is the notability limit for pop culture references? There are some listed that I don't see as needing to be there. What if we were to remove items such as those and then simply place them in their respective articles instead? -- Qaddosh|^talk|contribs 05:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Dresd 4.jpg

The image Image:Dresd 4.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Indianapolis?

"Kurt Vonnegut was born to fourth-generation German-American parents (Kurt Vonnegut, Sr., and Edith née Lieber), son and grandson in the Indianapolis firm Vonnegut & Bohn.[3], where he served as assistant managing editor and associate editor for the student newspaper, the Cornell Daily Sun, and majored in Chemistry" well, what is wrong with this? The Cornell Daily Sun is a newspaper at Cornell which is in Ithaca, New York and not Indianapolis and as far as I can tell other than having been born in Indy he didnt have much to do with it. But I guess that is enough to be included in the project indianapolis but more important were his connections to upstate ny, it really should be included in project new york since that is where he went to college, lived in his adult life, and set kilgore trout in (fictional ilium based on the real troy, ny and then later set in the real place of cohoes, ny) 24.182.142.254 (talk) 01:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

But Vonnegut does make frequent reference to being from Indianapolis and being a Hoosier in his essays. He clearly identifies himself with the place. By comparison, David Letterman has been in NY a long time also, but constantly reminds viewers he is from Indiana. Stevewunder (talk) 01:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Slaughterhouse-five introduction

In the World War II section, the article cites Slaughterhouse-Five a few sentences before introducing it as a novel detailing Vonnegut's experiences in the war. This citation before introducing the book is unclear because of the lack of a previous general description of it, and it causes the later introduction to seem awkward. The World War II section could be reorganized; maybe it could start with the book as a base for the information.72.66.134.127 (talk) 03:59, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Dulce et decorum est

I improved the translation, mostly by removing the barbaric word "appropriate." 71.194.38.54 (talk) 09:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Larry Siegel

Kurt Vonnegut's books and 12 letter names!?

Has anyone else noticed that most of the fictional characters created by kurt vonnegut consist of 12 characters? not counting spaces Mr. Rosewater-12 Billy Pilgrim-12 Monica Pepper-12 Zoltan Pepper-12 Kurt Vonnegut himself-12 Kilgore Trout-12 Dwayne Hoover-12 Wayne Hoogler-12 Dudley Prince-12 Kimberly Wang-12 Julian Castle-12 Philip Castle-12 Claire Minton-12

and more! >_>

This is probably just me being insane as usual, but i had to share what i found O.o

i myself often count characters in phrases and names and 12 is one of my favorite numbers, was this strange 12 letter naming system ever mentioned? This is driving me insane xD —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zackypoohs (talk • contribs) 21:21, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that's interesting. You might be on to something. 74.78.118.77 (talk) 21:43, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure it's "most"; skimming his book articles, very few of them have major characters with twelve-letter names. Most Western names seem likely to be between 10 and 15 letters long, so if you start looking for 12s (and deciding whether or not to count middle names, or to count the period at the end of "Mr."), you'll find plenty. --McGeddon (talk) 21:52, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Categories

American Tax Resisters? Really? Maybe I should remove that one until further notice. 74.78.118.77 (talk) 21:42, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Fictional Appearance

I don't know if it's notable or not, but Vonnegut appears (namelessly) in the Niven/Pournelle book "Inferno". http://www.math.nyu.edu/phd_students/campbelm/stuff/mywords/dante.html has more info on it. Rmd1023 (talk) 03:40, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Should Vonnegut be a redirect or a disambiguation page?

If you have an opinion, please make it known: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 September 7#Vonnegut.

There is also a related discussion about the disambiguation page: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vonnegut (disambiguation)

Cheers, older ≠ wiser 22:54, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Who does not agree with this? read it consider it.

This is a good speech it tells u some stuff that are true u will miss u friends and your family, for example my grandfather he was like my dad since i didn't have one that speech and song reminds me of him and my friends that had to leave because of the economy. He was one of the greatest man ever to write a speech like this this is almost like Barrack Obama, and if u don't agree its because u haven't though about it so what i would do is think of your parents when they pass away how would u feel good or bad then think of who took care of u most of the time think of what u could have done before some one close to you left like a friend. A friend is like part of your Family. This is the person who you think about and talk about your feelings.Then think what would u do with out those friends to support you to help you through difficult times in your life this a great thing to talk about and to think about Reply me if u ever think this is an idea.

---

Edgard--------^_^

Link is to the song/speech.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfq_A8nXMsQ&NR=1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.51.79.172 (talk) 02:39, 2 October 2009 (UTC) Edgard

The Wear Sunscreen song was not written by Vonnegut. -- Quiddity (talk) 04:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Category: TM Practitioner

Sorry I should have given this reference in the beginning. "Maharishi Mahesh Yogi" The Telegraph (February 7, 2008)-- — Kbob • Talk • 18:02, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Tell you what I have removed the category. If you feel the source listed above is notable you can add a sentence to the article and also add back the category tag. If you feel it is not notable, then nothing need be done.-- — Kbob • Talk • 02:40, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

So It Goes

Would it be poor form to add "So it goes." to the end of the Death section? It's a little un-encyclopedic, but not obtrusively so. I think it would be a nice touch to the article. Goodbye Galaxy (talk) 15:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree it would be a nice touch, but I believe this has been beaten to death and the consensus has been no. If it were up to me, I would add it, but it's not. Zazaban (talk) 19:29, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I hesitantly agree. We are trying to write engaging articles, after all. [update: Given that only 1 obituary seems to have used it in their title, I'm going to agree with Nick Graves that it is inappropriate. -- Quiddity (talk) 20:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I haven't read the previous discussion (Talk:Kurt_Vonnegut/Archive_2#Death/So_it_goes) and don't have time to currently. Could someone summarize the most relevant objections/points? -- Quiddity (talk) 21:41, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

It's a bad idea. It's unencyclopedic and hackneyed. And I think it would be obtrusive as well. A reader not already familiar with his works would likely come across that sentence and just find it peculiar. A reader familiar with his works (this one included) might find it cloying and groan-inducing. Really, it's just too obvious and hokey. Encyclopedic prose it is not. Nick Graves (talk) 23:50, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I read it, and came immediately here to see if anyone mentioned it. I laughed quite hard. I guess I'd say it's not appropriate for an encyclopedia only because it gives a tone, and encyclopedias don't have any author tones (or try not to). Heh, but I love it too much, and want it to stay. : ) 80.101.162.155 (talk) 10:20, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I saw it before it was removed. This I consider to be a personal vindication for me and the rest of my karass Zazaban (talk) 10:34, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

"The last lines that Vonnegut wrote, in his last book, go thus:"

Could somebody clarify this? It could mean either his last novel, that last book published before his death, or the most recent book published posthumously. It's not at all clear. Zazaban (talk) 00:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

So it goes

It's here again. Why get all prissy and delete it? Why not just leave it? What would Kurt say? Give me one good reason why it should not stay. And no crap about how this is Wikipedia, because THIS IS WIKIPEDIA! Fuck Encyclopedia Britannica, this is wikipedia. Gandydancer (talk) 04:49, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, not to worry. "John" has taken time out from his important edits about the Pope, Starbucks, and some other things I can't remember, to right this terrible wrong. Gandydancer (talk) 05:10, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Maybe it can be added in by finding some encyclopedic way to add it? As referenced in the Slaughterhouse-Five article.. "The story continually employs the refrain So it goes. when death, dying, and mortality occur, as a narrative transition to another subject, as a memento mori, as comic relief, and to explain the unexplained." Centerone (talk) 02:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Nationality

I don't think he should be categorized as German-American by nationality. By ethnicity, yes, but his grandfather was a native-born American, isn't three generations enough to be considered an American, period? Again, I'm not saying he wasn't German in any way, but it's ancestry rather than nationality. --99.249.18.156 (talk) 01:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

He brought this up a lot in his writings. Apparently, his family strongly identified with the label. Zazaban (talk) 23:14, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

library/museum

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/20/us/20vonnegut.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=a23 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.225.34.159 (talk) 06:29, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem

This article has been reverted by a bot to this version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot (talk) 14:28, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

This bot (10 Dec 10) stripped out work that was not subject to copyright violation. Quite a few edits have been made since the bot's edit. Could a regular editor to this article put back what was useful? Thanks. 23:32, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Appearances of Kurt Vonnegut

Someone who appears to be Kurt Vonnegut is featured briefly in Bob Dylan's music video "Has Anybody seen My Love?". That can be viewed on Youtube. Can it be confirmed whether or not that's Kurt playing the harmonica for a moment nearly midway through the video? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Wolk (talk • contribs) 01:56, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I believe Kurt Vonnegut appeared in the 2002 or 2003 in a Nissan Murano commercial that aired on Canadian television. The slogan was for your on road adventures. In the commercial a man goes out to the country and stops at a used book store and finds an original edition Breakfast of Champions. While waiting in line he realizes the man in front of him is Kurt Vonnegut who signs the book for him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott Howard 7 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Please mention the "Ambrosia" (band) connection and "Cat's Cradle" and the letter Kurt wrote praising the song "Nice, Nice, Very Nice"

Please mention the "Ambrosia" (band) connection and "Cat's Cradle" and the letter Kurt wrote praising the song "Nice, Nice, Very Nice." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.83.56.110 (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Vonnegut IS NOT cited as a humanist

As it stands, the introduction to this article states that Vonnegut was a preeminent humanist; however even the cited NY Times obituary makes no mention of those beliefs...immediate deletion of this part of the intro. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.11.54.147 (talk) 16:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

He was indeed a preeminent humanist, as the rest of the article states, with multiple references, had you bothered to read them. I have restored the statements with yet another reference for you. Elizium23 (talk) 17:05, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

He was honorary president of the American Humanist Association... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.183.59.246 (talk) 22:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

"Repatriated"?

The section on Vonnegut's WWII experiences states that he was "repatriated" by the Soviet Red Army. Because the verb "repatriate" means "to be returned to one's country of origin" (see http://m-w.com/dictionary/repatriate ) and which in this case is wrong (since he was freed from imprisonment but not sent to the USA by the Soviet Union), I changed this to "liberated." However, my change was undone because it did not adhere to "neutrality in the subject of Kurt Vonnegut." What does that mean? I simply made a better word choice here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexlange (talk • contribs) 00:05, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

My apologies, I did not read the paragraph for context and I did not understand that he had been a prisoner. In this case, 'liberated' is an appropriate word. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 01:02, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

On Vonnegut appearing in an Enron Commercial

A "citation needed" tag appeared after this blurb in the Appearances section: "Vonnegut appeared as part of the Enron 'Why' advertising campaign." I looked for a citation, but only found instances of Vonnegut excoriating Enron--in his Playboy interview, for example. Accordingly, I have removed the unsupported bullet point. It can be added again with a valid citation if one exists--but for now it just looked like the article had been vandalized in detriment to the character of the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pulsadinura (talk • contribs) 23:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Removal of {{tooshort}} from Kurt Vonnegut

This edit summary isn't in line with WP:LEAD. The lead section of an article should serve as a full summary of it and for an established article should likely be several paragraphs long. I'll be re-tagging this. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 08:18, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for telling me directly and for wiki-linking WP:LEAD. I had not been aware of it's statements. On the indicated topic it refers in section #Length: "The lead should establish significance, include mention of notable criticism or controversies, and be written in a way that makes readers want to know more. The appropriate length of the lead depends on that of the article, but should normally be no more than four paragraphs." Well. I'd say all these subjects (significance, criticism, style) are fulfilled in this lead. Vonnegut is significant above all for his works as a writer, he is controversely known as a liberal american citizen who supported human and civil rights and had rather humanist or even atheist views as for religion. What else contents should be missing - I have to ask you? Do you really think a broader lead of 3-4 paragraphs would be more instructive? I do not believe that - just for a better formal covering of a tabled proposal - there is any necessity to produce more lead phrases on his professional or private statements. It just makes no sense! In the german WP section where I'm mainly active we do not even know such ideas. And I'm quite an expericenced biography editor. We on the contrary do know and apply good old Ockham's Razor and "Keep it simple!". The normal reader isn't supposed to like long and winding roads of introduction paragraphs. -- Justus Nussbaum (talk) 11:21, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think a fuller lead would be constructive. The Vonnegut article's current lead section is wholly inadedquate: for one thing, it makes no reference at all of his military service, one of the defining points of his life. I'm aware de-WP has some significant differences to en-WP, but WP:LEAD is very well supported on en-WP and there's no way an article with such an aenemic lead would pass GA here, which is what we should be pushing towards with this article. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I see that you seem quite impressed by that first sentence, telling his life was deeply influenced by his experiences as a soldier and prisoner of war. Well, who would not expect that war is a massive impression for a young man? - And actually Vonnegut has used that emotional sources to write several of his books. But if I were to construct a psychological study of him I shouldn't do that within Wikipedia. Because it's against the rules - No original research, you know it as well as I do. Maybe some student of American literature has written a study - which I don't know. - By the way I want to point out the fact that there is a sentence in the existing lead which contains an extract of that. It's about his most famous novels and the three basic points of view Vonnegut used to apply: "satire, gallows humor and science fiction". Satire is for the weak points of human social life (remember he's a cultural anthropologist), SF is the interest for future possibilities; and gallows humor is a quality of emotional rescue against extremely dangered life experience such as in a war and POW. -- Justus Nussbaum (talk) 16:47, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

The lead section is not an exercise in brevity. Readers should be given sufficient context to understand why someone is well-known rather than simply in which circles they are famous. As for the the specific aspect of Vonnegut's wartime experiences, they form a key part of a great many secondary sources on him and in no way would such an assertion therefore be original research. Anyway, I've said my piece. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 23:55, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I just thought this talk about editing Vonnegut suited much better here than at my user talk site. -- Justus Nussbaum (talk) 14:58, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

"I am very real"

Kurt Vonnegut wrote the following amazing letter. Should this be included? - 114.76.227.0 (talk) 22:15, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

GPI

I remember reading about a reference to GPI or general paralysis of the insane in one of Kurts books. Then after reading about the role of the Substantia Nigra in motor function, and specifically that the Globus Palidus external is involved with involuntary movement and the Globus Palidus internal is involved with voluntary movements. When was this named the GPi and its function understood? Was Kurt aware of this when he wrote, and in fact is GPI a reference to the GPi??

come on wiki, someone out there must have more information ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.101.100.14 (talk) 09:16, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Farm work / Teaching at universities

This 1973 letter by Vonnegut contains some information not in the article:

• [I] did a lot of farm work as a boy.

• I have raised six [at the time] children .... Two of them are farmers.

• I have served on the faculties of the University of Iowa, Harvard, and the City College of New York. [doubtless more later on]

I don't see any of this mentioned in this Wiki article, so I thought I'd post that here. Softlavender (talk) 17:51, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Recurring themes?

It might be wise to list several recurring themes in his books -- most importantly, the recounting of his son's death through decapitation in Sweden after desertion from Vietnam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignatiusantioch (talk • contribs) 6 July 2007‎

Education of Kurt Vonnegut Sr. in #Early life

Article stated that both Kurt and the elder Kurt attended Cornell. However, Kurt Sr. was an MIT BS in architecture, class of 1908, as was his father, Bernard Vonnegut Sr.. Kurt Sr. also atteneded the American School in Strasburg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by James Russiello (talk • contribs) 28 February 2010‎

Excessive Paragraph on Religion

Last night I removed the last paragraph under the religious paragraph. It has since occurred to me that I probably should've discussed the removal here before doing it. So here is a justification of what I did:

The paragraph called Vonnegut's views on religion "unconventional and nuanced" without citation. I know nothing "unconventional" or "nuanced" about secular humanism, atheism, agnosticism, etc. It went on to call him an "ardent admirer" of Jesus. The "ardent" is unnecessary and unsupported, though the "admirer" part holds for certain aspects of Jesus's philosophy, which were cited. This does not suffice to qualify him as an "admirer" of Jesus, but only those statements made on the Sermon on the Mount which were cited. I moved this part to a more appropriate paragraph in the section. The paragraph then said that "while he often identified himself as an agnostic or atheist, he also frequently spoke of God." His atheism and agnosticism were already mentioned several times in the section, so this information was superfluous. Further, his "frequent" speaking of God seems irrelevant, not to mention poorly cited. In fact, the article cited consists of the interviewer asking him about religion; in contributes nothing to the claim that he "frequently spoke of God" himself, though I don't personally deny the claim -- it just doesn't seem appropriate, and is too vague. After all, "God" is one of the most frequently discussed topics by our species. The paragraph continued: "Despite describing freethought, humanism and agnosticism as his "ancestral religion," and despite being a Unitarian, he also spoke of himself as being irreligious." This, too, was redundant information. The very same statements were made only two paragraphs before. Moreover, his being "irreligious" is synonymous with the aforementioned agnosticism, freethinking, etc.

I hope this offers a good justification for the removal of the paragraph and the new placement of the relevant, cited comment about Jesus. Wiki.correct.1 (talk) 22:55, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Writing career

The writing career section says that ice nine is a recurring idea. Where does it appear besides in Cat's Cradle? Also the analysis of what ice nine represents is unsourced original research. Ashmoo 13:51, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

It is claimed that "Report on the Barnhouse Effect" was his first short story published, in 1950. I need to research it, but I'm pretty sure he published in the late 40's. My recollection is that he was able to quit his "nightmare fucking job" (as described in a letter to his father) at GE to make a living as a short story writer, and that by the time Player Piano was published he made less money on it than he had on his first short story. (in the late 40's you could make a very good living publishing short stories in popular magazines -- and I believe this is what Vonnegut did.) Again, I do need to find the citations before I change anything, but if anyone else already knows the relevant sources it would be useful.

Lecturer: I also think it is relevant that Vonnegut spent years on the college lecture circuit. He says somewhere "You can make more money from speaking at a half-broke college than writing the greatest short story in the world." A comparison with his idol Twain could be made in this respect, as Twain made a fortune on the lecture circuit. Stevewunder (talk) 01:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

When discussing Harrison Bergeron, egalitarianism seems to be the incorrect description, specifically when this is contrasted with statism, which more correctly describes the story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.112.101.73 (talk) 19:52, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Egalitarianism, of an extreme sort enforced by a state, seems to be an exactly correct description in regard to Harrison Bergeron. Why else cripple people to deprive them of natural abilities and talent in such specific ways? This story takes egalitarianism beyond the usual meaning of making people equal in legal rights, personal material wealth, and social status to the absurd point of making them literally equal in their persons as well.Jszigeti (talk) 21:30, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Art Career

Vonnegut's art was extremely important to him, and to how he understood himself even though he was of course known as a writer. The article ought to have a reasonable amount of material on his art and how he viewed it. The paragraph about his exhibition in 1980 is extremely well sourced with 3 separate newspaper accounts, as well as two catalogues of university library document collections.

As to the library collections, although this should hardly matter, it is worth pointing out that I am not making any original claims as to the documents in those collections. I am citing those University libraries' claims about the nature of those documents. In effect, therefore, those catalogues are secondary sources and not primary sources.

Furthermore, even if somehow those were not acceptable sources because someone considers them to be "primary," they are not necessary to any of the content for which they are cited. So why, therefore, would someone delete all the content while complaining that sources which are entirely dispensible are unacceptable sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chicago57th (talk • contribs) 02:28, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

ice-9 recurring?

The article states

"In addition to recurring characters, there are also recurring themes and ideas. One of them is ice-nine..."

I don't recall ice-nine being mentioned anywhere except in Cat's Cradle, so I don't think this is right. Herostratus (talk) 03:39, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Me neither. Time to take it out. --McGeddon (talk) 15:53, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Use of a Kurt Vonnegut signature phrase 'so it goes' as a comment on his death

The New York Times obituary for Kurt Vonnegut, Novelist Who Caught the Imagination of His Age, Is Dead at 84 from April 12, 2007 contains more than one obituary within the obituary, quoted from Vonnegut's novels, as follow

• “Slaughterhouse-Five” provided another stage for his fictional alter ego, Kilgore Trout, a recurring character introduced in “God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater.” The novel also featured a signature Vonnegut phrase. “Robert Kennedy, whose summer home is eight miles from the home I live in all year round,” Mr. Vonnegut wrote at the end of the book, “was shot two nights ago. He died last night. So it goes.
  
• “Martin Luther King was shot a month ago. He died, too. So it goes. And every day my Government gives me a count of corpses created by military science in Vietnam. So it goes. ”One of many Zenlike words and phrases that run through Mr. Vonnegut’s books, “so it goes” became a catchphrase for opponents of the Vietnam war.
  

In the section of the Kurt Vonnegut Wikipedia article that immediately follows the line about his death you can find this line "Vonnegut's well-known phrase "so it goes," used ironically in reference to death, also originated in "Slaughterhouse-Five". "Its combination of simplicity, irony, and rue is very much in the Vonnegut vein." and THAT line is from the Kurt Vonnegut obit from the Boston Globe.

The Kurt Vonnegut Wikipedia article is diminished and flat WITHOUT 'and so it goes' as a comment on his death - and even the manner of his death - it acknowledges the man, his work, and his outlook. It is especially appropriate considering that this author, who surived the fire-bombing of Dresden (as a prisoner of war) in which over 100,000 persons died in a single night - should come to his end as prosaically as falling down the stairs. It occurs to me that a good hook for DYK might be 'Did you know the phrase "and so it goes" is used more than 100 times in the novel "Slaughterhouse-Five" by Kurt Vonnegut (this for the Wikipedia article Slaughterhouse-Five. I really do think the phrase enriches the bio article. Read the two Wikipedia articles Kurt Vonnegut and Slaughterhouse-Five plus the NTY and Boston Globe obits and see if you don't agree. And better yet, read "Slaughterhouse-Five". Neonorange (talk) 21:01, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

• I have read everything and I don't agree with you. This was discussed in detail at the time of the subject's death and we agreed not to use it. --John (talk) 21:20, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
  

"...I don't agree with you." is not persuasive, though thank you for the response. I just dug through the six-year old archived discussion here; thank you for suggesting it. I think is not a case of 'a memorial', but rather a way to enrich the article. When we read, many times, most of us will come across an idea, explanation, or literary trope we don't immediately understand. A natural reaction might be stretching out for a reference - and it might be Wikipeda. Or, in the case of this particular Kurt Vonnegut, reading a few lines further along. If an encyclopedia article is limited to the current knowledge of the reader, well... Neonorange (talk) 02:12, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

oppose inclusion in wikipedia's voice again, this would be fine in the rolling stone obit, and it's fine to discuss it in this article, but to leave it as a sort of in-joke nod to Vonnegut I think goes a bit far. It makes the article have a personal voice, instead of a neutral one. Pinging @Drmies: and @Victoriaearle: experienced FA editors for more comment.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 02:27, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, leaving it as an 'in-joke' nod to Vonnegut is not a good idea, and I was too precipitate to revert the original four word inclusion. BUT there are other considerations and other ways to the phrase. And such ways would require hard work (as would bringing up the level of the entire article). I can easily imagine this sort of discussion in publications (in the broad sense) of record. And I can easily imagine the results going either way - as, in fact, it has (speaking here of something a bit more intelligent than just the bare insertion of the ellipsis). Neonorange (talk) 03:46, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

'Enrich' LOL, no. We do not customize biographies to the whims of anyone's fans. Otherwise, Kevin Smith would be laden with profanity and drug references, and Lady Gaga would have a striped, hot-pink background and other artistic "improvements". Here at Wikipedia we adhere to an encyclopedic tone, a neutral point of view and a manual of style that tends to homogenize articles. This is not to make them boring, this is to make them readily accessible to the largest number of people. When someone visits a Wikipedia article, s/he knows what to expect. In theory, that means the article is written impassively yet designed to inform, without surprises and without puffery and exaggeration. If you want to copy this article and modify it, then go ahead - it is licensed CC-BY-SA 3.0. You can host your own website or blog or whatever, and do what you want to the article, as long as it is attributed and licensed in the same manner. But here on servers hosted by Wikimedia, we have a particular focus and goal, and you are not allowed to insert fan phrases, and it will be typically considered vandalism. Elizium23 (talk) 03:04, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

How's this for a deal: I will forgive you for using 'LOL' and the editorial 'we' in the same paragraph if you will forgive me for a precipitate revert. Neonorange (talk) 03:46, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I think the only possible ways to phrase it would be something like "Many obituaries ended by quoting Vonnegut's line from Slaughterhouse-Five: So it goes." or "The writer's close friend X reflected that Vonnegut may well have said, of his own death...", which make the point, but this seems clunky and trivialising to the casual reader if placed at the end of the "Personal life" section ("when the famous writer died, the most significant reaction was that some people quoted his catchphrase"). Trivialising death is obviously the point of the quote, but Wikipedia articles should take a neutral tone rather than including coded references to the subject's work.

Mention of the use of "so it goes" in obituaries would be fine in the "Writing career" section, though, where it already discusses the phrase. --McGeddon (talk) 09:57, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions. I agree with you. I will make a try at it off-line and place the results here. Making no promises how soon - seems like a lot of work... as it should be. Neonorange (talk) 01:36, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - this comes up about once a week. We should try, to the extent possible, to have a consistent style and tone throughout articles. GabrielF (talk) 03:56, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Tributes/Popular culture section

Recently a lot of stuff was removed, while other things were left, there didn't seem to be much in the way of reasoning why one thing would be important while the other wasn't. I reverted the edit with the thought that this should be discussed and "reformatted" (as suggested) rather than just deleted. I will include the text below, feel free to discuss them entry by entry and suggest ways to re-work the section(s). Centerone (talk) 22:26, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

From the page:

• A sort of anti-tribute appears in Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle's novel Inferno, which is set in Dante's Hell. The protagonist, a version of Niven himself, encounters Vonnegut's tomb in the city of Dis; another character theorizes it is punishment for Vonnegut's satire of religion in several of his stories. The protagonist utters bitter criticism of Vonnegut's talent, but it is not clear whether it should be seen as actual criticism of Vonnegut or of the character's own ego.
• The 2009 Hollywood adaptation of Vonnegut's story "Harrison Bergeron", a film entitled 2081 is dedicated "To Kurt Vonnegut, Jr."
• At the annual Indianapolis-Marion County Public Library McFadden Memorial Lecture at Butler University in Indianapolis, on April 27, 2007, where Vonnegut was being honored posthumously, his son Mark delivered a speech that the author wrote for the event, and which was reported as the last thing he wrote. It ends with this: "I thank you for your attention, and I'm outta here."
• Filmmaker Michael Moore included Vonnegut in the dedications for his 2007 film Sicko; at the end of the film, the words "Thank You Kurt Vonnegut for Everything" appear on the screen.
• The satirical newspaper The Onion contained a tribute to Vonnegut soon after he died, with a reference to his work Slaughterhouse-Five stating that he shouldn't be referred to as dead "without checking Dresden for his younger self first."
• On November 11, 2007, Wynkoop Brewing Company in Denver, reintroduced Kurt's Mile High Malt to celebrate the late author's birthday. The beer was originally created by Vonnegut's grandfather, Albert Lieber, of the Indianapolis Brewery, using coffee as the secret ingredient. Kurt's Mile High Malt was first brewed in 1996 thanks to Wynkoop Founder and Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, a friend of Vonnegut's. At Vonnegut's request, coffee was added to the Mile High Malt, making it a close recreation of his grandfather's original.
• When Vonnegut died, members of the Alplaus Volunteer Fire Department in New York lowered the American flag to half staff, hung the funeral shroud, and rang a fire bell in accordance with the traditional 5-5-5 alarm used to honor fallen brothers. Vonnegut's name still appears on an old active fire-fighters roster, located next to a screen-print that he donated to the department.
• Guitarist Joe Satriani wrote his song Ice 9 about the fictional substance from Cat's Cradle.
• The Grateful Dead's publishing company, Ice-Nine Publishing Co., was named after the substance from Cat's Cradle.
• The Christian alternative band, Breakfast With Amy has an album called Everything Was Beautiful And Nothing Hurt, which was written on a tombstone illustration for Slaughterhouse-Five.
• Elvis Costello's song, Man Out Of Time, is based on the character of Billy Pilgrim.
• The band billy pilgrim is an homage to the main character of Slaughterhouse-Five.
• The 1975 song "Nice, Nice, Very Nice" by the rock band Ambrosia uses lyrics Vonnegut wrote for his 1963 novel Cat's Cradle. Vonnegut was delighted with the song and shared a writing credit with the band. The entire letter of appreciation he wrote in 1976 appears in the band's 1997 CD release Anthology; an excerpt is available here.
• The Florida based punk band Discount have a song called "K.V. T-Shirt" off their album "Alexia's Alright Tonight".
• The band Deadeye Dick takes its name from the title of Vonnegut's 1982 novel.
• The title of American alternative rock band The Nixons's 1995 release Foma is a reference to one of the central tenets of Bokononism, meaning "harmless lies or untruths". They also did a song of the same name.
• The abstract beat-driven electronic artist Lukid references Vonnegut twice by way of song titles on their 2009 release Foma: one song called Ice-Nine and another called Foma.
• The title of Andrew Jackson Jihad's 2007 album People That Can Eat People Are the Luckiest People in the World is taken from a line of Hocus Pocus.
• The American rock bands Granfalloon and Granfalloon Bus both reference one of the central tenets of Bokononism. As does the zine Granfalloon.
• The Arizona based punk label Gilgongo Records takes its name from one of the stories by Kilgore Trout included in Breakfast of Champions. Additionally there was once a Danish band that went by Gilgongo.
• The Chicago-based instumental/electronic band Ilium is named after the fictional town of the same name in several Vonnegut novels.
• In Cleveland there is an upscale clothier named after Kilgore Trout.
• There is a Russian Goa trance artist who goes by DJ Kilgore Trout and a US-based experimental breakbeat artist who goes by Kilgore Trout as well as a 2011 hardcore noise rock band called Kilgore Trout.
• Smashing Pumpkins thanks Vonnegut in the liner notes for Mellon Collie And The Infinite Sadness. That album features a song titled Galapogos and a song called Bodies which is similar to the story Unready To Wear from the collection Welcome to the Monkey House.
• The Dandy Warhols released a 2003 record called Welcome to the Monkey House.
• Born Ruffians have a song named for Vonnegut which includes some lines from a poem in Cat's Cradle.
• Al Stewart's 1974 album Modern Times features a song titled Sirens of Titan which has many references to that book, notably the line "I was the victim of a series of accidents, as are we all."

... Centerone (talk) 22:27, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree with your revert. This is an important article, and these inclusions have been here for some time. It should be discussed rather than a decision of one editor. Gandydancer (talk) 23:21, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

No, sixteen of the 25 bullet points were added only yesterday at the decision of a single editor.

I cut it to the three slightly detailed stories of tributes made after his death, in chronological order - that the Alplaus Volunteer Fire Department honoured him as a "fallen brother" when he died, that his son Mark later read a posthumous speech Vonnegut had written, and months later a brewer reintroduced their Vonnegut beer. As I said in the edit summary, the rest were minor pop culture "X mentioned or took a title from or dedicated something to the massively popular cult literary figure Kurt Vonnegut" - these don't seem particular remarkable in themselves, and I felt they were detracting from the meaningful tributes. By presenting these as equivalent bullet points, we're suggesting that the fact that a Floria punk band once wrote a song called K.V. T-Shirt is no more or less important than Mark Vonnegut reading aloud the last words Kurt ever wrote.

If we want to explain to the reader that Vonnegut was widely respected and quoted throughout his career and after his death, we should say that, in a brief paragraph, rather than unveiling a laundry list of a dozen bands the reader has never heard of, and forcing them to be the judge of any significance. --McGeddon (talk) 07:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Two editors. WP:IPC is a useful essay which explains why unsourced and indiscriminate cruft collections like this do not belong on a serious article. Please read it, and add third-party sources to any you want to keep. --John (talk) 05:46, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry McGeddon, I missed that. Cut what you feel best. This sort of info can go on forever--LOL, see one that I work on and watch, Blue moon. Gandydancer (talk) 20:35, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Understandable, but I believe some of it deserves to be reviewed for inclusion on a case by case basis. In addition, while there was a recent addition, I would suspect that some of this has come and gone over time. (Normally I track really far back edit by edit, but I am not going to do that for this article right now.) Relationships and tributes that might have been acknowledged during his life I believe should be explored in some way, and as it suggests "Please reorganize this content to explain the subject's impact on popular culture rather than simply listing appearances" some of the content may be effective if re-written to show his impact. Personally, I don't see the point of entries like 'he died, and some people cared so they lowered the flag in tribute' vs. 'here's some real impact that he had and ways that people have interpreted and been influenced by his work.' One relationship that may be worthy of more inspection was that he had more than a passing relationship with the Grateful Dead.. not only did they name their publishing company for them, but they actually had purchased the film rights to one of his works, and he also socially interacted with them. Centerone (talk) 07:15, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Awards

The boxout lists Vonnegut as receiving the Prisoner of War Medal, but I'm not sure that was ever the case. Though he certainly qualifies for a retroactive award, I can't find evidence that he ever applied for it or collected it. The Kurt Vonnegut Memorial Library displays awards that include his Purple Heart and ribbon bar (to be precise, a couple of ribbon bars, some of which show duplicates and so were probably worn at different times) and it doesn't feature the POWM. Can anyone confirm (or deny) the award?

Furthermore, it seems unusual to me that the European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign ribbon displayed in the Library has three service stars, denoting four separate campaigns. As far as I can tell, Vonnegut would've qualified for two or maybe three at most (Ardennes-Alsace, Central Europe and perhaps Rhineland). Could there be an error in the ribbon's presentation, or am I in error? — Preceding unsigned comment added by StoneColdCrazy (talk • contribs) 22:52, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

What is going on with the photo?

Wasn't there a photo in place before that depicted him as he best known at the peak of his career? What purpose is served by replacing it with a picture taken before he even went to Dresden? I suggest restoring the previous one, unless there were intractable copyright issues, and incorporating others later on in the article as appropriate. Jszigeti (talk) 17:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

It was changed in this edit. There is no other free image currently available on Commons. The other image, File:Kurt Vonnegut at CWRU.jpg depicts an elderly Vonnegut from 2004, and is copyrighted. It could be used in this article "Where no free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information" but the question is whether the Army picture is adequate. Elizium23 (talk) 17:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Kurt was from the US. He is not 'american'. 'American' can include Canadians, Guatemalans, Brazilians, Colombians... Isn't it enough to have co-opted the entire western hemisphere? Do you have to steal their national identity as well?

Sorry, person-who-doesn't-sign-their-name, but "American" is the English word for a citizen of the only country in the world whose name includes the word "America". There are lots of North Americans, South Americans, and Central Americans who aren't Americans. That's just the way it is. Accept that and get on with your life. --Thnidu (talk) 16:48, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Proposal: Drastic Slashing of "Tributes"

Hi-ho. It occurs to me that the Tributes section is rather bloated with trivial entries, mainly a bunch of references to his work in rock and pop music. I would like to propose that each of these mentions be moved to the individual pages for the specific works referenced for each entry, i.e. if a bunch of post-hardcore bands referenced "The Euphio Question," then that will be mentioned at the Welcome to the Monkey House article, rather than here.

Many of the pages for Vonnegut's individual novels/short stories include a fair amount of such pop culture cruft, and that's fine, I suppose. I can't really see why some references are elevated to being mentioned here at the author's article...

But it would be a fairly major reduction for the section. Here's what I'm thinking could be easily moved:

• The Elvis Costello song "Man Out Of Time" is based on the character Billy Pilgrim.
• The 1975 song, "Nice, Nice, Very Nice", by the rock band Ambrosia uses lyrics Vonnegut wrote for his 1963 novel Cat's Cradle. Vonnegut was delighted with the song and shared a writing credit with the band.
• The Born Ruffians included in their debut album, Red, Yellow & Blue, a song entitled "Kurt Vonnegut", which contains lines from Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle.
• "Members Only", a song by experimental hip-hop band Mad Conductor, references a quote from the book of Bokonon in Cat's Cradle: "Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly, Man got to sit and wonder 'why, why, why?' Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land, Man got to tell himself he understand."
• "Happiness By The Kilowatt", a song by Canadian Post-Hardcore band Alexisonfire, makes several references to Vonnegut's short story, "The Euphio Question."
• The Philadelphia-area based hardcore/post-hardcore band This Day Forward entitled a mostly instrumental song "Euphio Question" on their 2003 release In Response.

Anyway, I'd like to hear if there are any objections. I'll go ahead with this in about a week if it doesn't seem too controversial. And, for the record, I wasn't the one to add the "In Popular Culture" problem template, though I do agree with it. Antepenultimate (talk) 03:10, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Alright, I'm interpreting silence as approval, and I've made the move. I straight-up deleted the Elvis Costello entry; I can find no reliable sources backing it up, and in fact one source that discusses the song's origins specifically and makes no reference to Billy. Reorganized and cleaned-up the other entries as well. Also removed the "In Popular Culture" template now that the trivial stuff is hopefully gone? Antepenultimate (talk) 02:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Page attacked by vandal

This page is under attack by Redanalsword who thinks replacing the photo of Vonnegut with trash is funny. I rolled back five such demonstrations of creativity and put a warning on User_talk:Redanalsword where two previous warnings appeared. Ornithikos (talk) 19:14, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Religion quote box

Ceradon, regarding the quote box in the Religion section, could you double-check the "Jesus' " you have? I don't have a copy of the novel, but Todd E. Davis in Kurt Vonnegut's Crusade has it as "Jesus's " in quoting that line. (p. 33)--Wehwalt (talk) 22:56, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Wehwalt, source says "Jesus' Sermon". --ceradon (talk • edits) 03:41, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

OK. It may be a UK/US thing. I'll look at a copy of the book at some point.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:03, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Nanette Vonnegut

"A writer, painter, and self-identified little sister, she raised three kids and thinks of herself as normal." [3] b. 1957, married since 1982, children: Max, Ezra and Nellie. [4] "Ms. Vonnegut, who has been married to Scott Prior for 30 years."[5], 11/20/12 --87.153.123.164 (talk) 03:01, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

I think you're missing the point. This is a talk page to discuss issues regarding the article. This is not a place to build or edit the article. Also, even if you were editing the article itself, you are not making a good case for expanding the section about his family. There is no real reason to include this information in an article about Kurt. Centerone (talk) 04:40, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Centerone. And given the fact that Ms. Vonnegut has a website it is a bit promotional--Wehwalt (talk) 13:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Categories

Re the recent revert of my edit. It was just that I have never seen a list this long before and found it visually offensive (clutter). Sorry if I over-reacted. But I must admit I hate categories like this: "American male writers". Why it is needed I don't know, other than as a petty male response to feminist arguments about how women writers are neglected. Rwood128 (talk) 20:28, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

It is applied because "American" and "male" are WP:DEFINING characteristics and the cross-section of the two is useful for navigation. It likewise struck me as absurd that Kurt Vonnegut should be taken out of a category called "Kurt Vonnegut". Elizium23 (talk) 20:31, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks for helping me better understand the potential usefulness of categories. I must admit that they can be valuable aids in expanding articles. Rwood128 (talk) 21:43, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kurt Vonnegut. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.vonnegutlibrary.org/about/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:20, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

New 2016 edition of The Vonnegut Encyclopedia by Marc Leeds

FYI, new 2016 edition of The Vonnegut Encyclopedia by Marc Leeds. Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 02:12, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Sounds like a useful resource. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:24, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

kurt vonnegut is one of the best american authors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.38.237.34 (talk) 18:46, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Died From

Kurt VonnegutJr. died of a traumatic brain injury. After a fall on his new york brownstone ( aka his house ). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexanderctheboss (talk • contribs) 18:53, 24 January 2019 (UTC)