Talk:Time Cube: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 07:12, 29 June 2004 editAndrewa (talk \| contribs)Administrators61,996 edits →Four cornered?: agree, obviously← Previous edit		Revision as of 01:39, 26 October 2024 edit undoPARAKANYAA (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers43,997 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Skip to talk}}
	See ] for a past discussion on whether this article should have been deleted.
			{{Talk header}}
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
			\|maxarchivesize = 100K
			\|counter = 17
			\|algo = old(31d)
			\|archive = Talk:Time Cube/Archive %(counter)d
			}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell \|class=C \|living=no \|1=
			{{WikiProject Websites \|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Internet culture \|importance=low}}
			{{WikiProject Skepticism \|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Alternative Views \|importance=Low}}
			}}
			{{Article history\|action1=afd
			\|action1date=2004-01-24
			\|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Time Cube
			\|action1result=keep

			\|action2=afd
	----
			\|action2date=2004-02-03
			\|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Time Cube (2nd nomination)
			\|action2result=keep

			\|action3=FAC
	All the anti-Cubic arguments in the "Time Cube" article are actually wrong and can be easily refuted. However, rather than correct the article myself, I will simply invite any free thinkers who are interested in learning the Truth to debate Time Cube on the <strike>Time Cube forum</strike>. No closed-minded Academian pedants, please.
			\|action3date=2005-03-30
			\|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Time Cube/archive1
			\|action3result=not promoted
			\|action3oldid=11699082

			\|action4=afd
	UPDATE: The forum is out of commission. However I may discuss Time Cube on user talk pages, like I did with Andrewa.
			\|action4date=2005-04-26
			\|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Time Cube (3rd nomination)
			\|action4result=keep

			\|action5=afd
	----
			\|action5date=2006-10-26
			\|action5link=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Time Cube (4th nomination)
			\|action5result=keep

			\|action6=AFD
	Archived debate: ]
			\|action6date=15:19, 29 October 2008
			\|action6link=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Time Cube (5th nomination)
			\|action6result=keep

			\|action7=AFD
	==Section removed==
			\|action7date=17:35, 16 March 2010
			\|action7link=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Time Cube (6th nomination)
			\|action7result=keep

			\|action8=AFD
	was removed by an anonymous user, with the explanation "The time cube theory uses the cube as an analogy to help describe ideas. Stretching the analogy is not a good way to refute the theory." I'm no Time Cube expert, but it seems to me that Gene stretches the analogy ''himself'', which would make this a perfectly valid subject of criticism. Comments, anyone? ] 19:05, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
			\|action8date=18:48, 29 July 2010
			\|action8link=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Time Cube (7th nomination)
			\|action8result=keep
			\|action8oldid=376078972

			\|currentstatus=FFAC
	: I think the time cube is nonsense, but "stretching an analogy too far" means drawing false conclusions by assuming that the perfectly describes something else. If Gene Ray is using the analog to draw new conclusions, it's possible that this happened. It's also possible that he made conclusions without reasoning about an actual cube. Neither you nor I know which of these happened.
			}}
			{{controversial}}
			{{mergedfrom\|Gene Ray}}
			{{Not a forum}}

			== doctor's degree ==
	: It's probable that he feels there are no remotely adequate words to describe the concept he has (I think that this is the reason he calls words evil). If this is the case, he might use an analogy to try to get his general idea across. If "cubelike" is a fairly adequate word, you would be justified in saying that he stretches the word (not the analogy) a bit too much. However, if he feels there are no words that are even close (including "cube"), he would be justified in picking the word that makes the best analog and stretching the word to make it fit what he's trying to say. Giving new definitions to old words when mainstream science makes a discovery is an accepted practice.

			Does he really have a PhD? Couldn't find anything about it, just that he started to call himself Dr. in 2002. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 16:18, 10 August 2018 (UTC)</small>
	: Now, on to the removed section itself. The criticism of "quadrant" because it uses a nonstandard definition was deleted first. There is no suitable replacement and Gene Ray gives a clear definition of it, so it should cause no confusion. The use of the term, by itself, certainly doesn't cause any logical errors.

			== Suicide of Richard Janczarski ==
	: The criticism of "cube" was because Gene Ray focuses on the four sides of the cube and ignores the top and bottom. This is perfectly reasonable if the concept deals only with a four-sided, cubelike object. The top and bottom would be irrelevant to the theory, regardless of the fact that the top and bottom are symmetrical with each of the sides. '''''Ignoring irrelevant attributes of an analog is preferred because it focuses on the things that are actually similar and important to understanding and it ignores things that are dissimilar or unimportant'''''. Bringing them up is foolish and a ].

			This section does not include any mention of Janczarski commiting suicide. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:17, 8 December 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	: Bringing up the fact that four is a square number, rather than a cube number, is also a red herring. If the thing under discussion is better understood by analogy to a three-dimensional shape (like a cube with the top and bottom missing), then using a square to represent it is stupid. A cube with two sides missing is much closer to a cube than a square and no amount of saying "but four is a square number" will change that.
			:True. The reason is given as an edit summary. --] (]) 20:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
			::I've removed "Suicide of" from the heading as it's no longer applicable to the content. ] ] 20:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

			== Help a Newbie Out ==
	: ] 23:40, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

			I made a few contributions to the page, mostly based on the past edit of Richard Janczarski's death being removed, but in return was mostly removed by a user named ](I don't know how to link to names, hopefully what I did works). Hopefully he can help me out? I am new to wikipedia editing of course, and I understand why some of my edit's were removed, but I have a few questions. I hope I am typing this in the right place to even communicate this.
	::Okay, this is quite sufficiently detailed to convince me the removal was well thought out. Thanks for answering; I tend to err on the side of caution when someone I don't recognize deletes a large block of text that I don't fully understand and I hope I didn't come across as assuming bad intentions. :) ] 00:26, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

			1. Why doesn't Fredrik Knudsen's documentary Down The Rabbit Hole on this topic not constitute as a source? In my view this would constitute as the greatest source outside of what is on the Cubic Awareness Online website/TimeCube website or their owners direct statements. If the documentary does constitute as a source, I'd like to know how to revise the edits I made to better suit this wikipage to better improve the accuracy of this article instead of just throwing everything from it out the window.
	== Four cornered? ==
	Has this idiot not noticed that cubes are not 4-cornered, but rather have 8 vertices? Also 6 faces, and 3 faces meeting at each vertex. There's almost ''nothing'' fourish about a cube! --]] 19:57, 2004 Jun 20 (UTC)

			2. Richard Janczarski killed himself. This fact isn't really in dispute. I'd like to know why attempts to bring light of this significant event in TimeCubes history keep getting removed. So far it has just been "insignificant" source claims with both the Down The Rabbit Hole documentary and his gravestone. I understand just some random gravestone that ''could'' be his being removed, but this is definitely and not in dispute his gravestone.
	:Criticism of this was the subject of the section whose removal I questioned above. Perhaps some version of it should be restored after all. ] 21:09, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

			A lot of TimeCube's history has gone unarchived, leading to these conflicts of not having any direct sources, but I am confused as why events that did take place and did happen to a definite degree are unable to be attributed to the TimeCube wikipage just because the evidence for them happening isn't retrievable, yet comments made in a school newspaper are somehow used as a proper source.
	::I think there should be, obviously, as I wrote . Feel free to put it back, or preferably to improve upon it, I don't think it's the last word by any means. I caution against any careless use of technical terms in criticising the Time Cube, Ray does this all the time in promoting it and if others do too this will just make the confusion worse. ] 07:12, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

			TL;DR Am a newbie, but want to better flesh out this article. Can someone help me out?
			UPDATED: Found reasons why that stuff was removed in earlier post, can it further be explained to me so I can fully understand and work around those imposed limitations? I just don't understand why it's so hard to express the fact that he died by suicide, which is important in relation to the article. Also, how can the Down The Rabbit Hole source be changed to better suit the claims made here? It feels like a complete waste just tossing it out because it says more than what it's being sourced for.
			<!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:54, 14 January 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			:{{u\|ThyShyFly}}, content requires reliable, independent sources for verifiability (learn more at ]). ] are not considered reliable (with limited exceptions, which Knudsen's video doesn't meet). This is an article about a specific website, so Janczarski's death isn't relevant unless there is a reliable source noting it ''and'' connecting it to TimeCube in some way. ] ] 22:08, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

			== Richard Janczarski ==

			A recent edit by ] has removed Richard Janczarski in his entirety from the article. He states, "None of this is sourced anyway. If we're not going to write about him committing suicide because there is no source for it, why mention him at all? There is no source for him."

			Going back into the history, the whole Richard Janczarski part had two sources, one linking to one of his youtube videos and the other to a radio interview. Neither really supported anything they were sourced to.

			Despite the lack of evidence, I personally think the removal of the Richard Janczarski section is disappointing, as he was a huge part of the TimeCube saga, I'd even go as far to say that he was more important than Dr. Jene Ray himself just due to Richard's website, , really making it clear (at least as clear as TimeCube can be) what TimeCube is about. Currently, other wiki related websites are leagues above this article on wikipedia just due to them having more information with regards to TimeCube.

			Here are some important links related to Richard Janczarski.

			https://yadi.sk/d/t8cdVYIpjMEPn in this radio interview, Richard Janczarski admits he got kicked out of university but got re-enrolled because of TimeCube. The interviewer also uses the term "Cubicist" to describe people who believed in TimeCube. Also gives the background behind his "Second Wisist Human" title.
			http://web.archive.org/web/20200220173816/http://cubicao.tk/CubicAwarenessOnline This is an archive of the CubicAwarenessOnline website, describes TimeCube in its entirety, and was the website around the GraveyardoftheGods community.
			https://www.youtube.com/user/Pyramid0rz Richard Janczarski's official youtube account, has lots of TimeCube videos with two seperate movie projects on it.

			Lots more links, these are just some I had handy. I just think Richard Janczarski's entire removal from the wikipage would be a disappointment. Want to see what other editors think though. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:44, 22 January 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			:Misplaced Pages is based on independent, reliable, published sources. Cubic Awareness is Janczarski's personal website which is neither independent nor reliable. Same goes for his Youtube channel. The radio interview is the only source that's not self-published, however it is publishing Janczarski's words verbatim with no fact-checking or analysis. Since coverage in ] is nonexistent, this section fails the ] requirement, –] ] 13:14, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
			:Seconded. All of that may be of interest to true heads on this topic but, and I say this as someone with my username, Misplaced Pages is not a fan wiki. Just because information is of interest to a reader deep into a particular topic doesn't mean it needs to be added here, especially with the sort of references cited to include it. ] (]) 07:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

			:Huh, Misplaced Pages didn't notify me of the mention like it usually does. Strange. Anyway, ], I fully get where you're coming from. The two issues are that there was a severe lack of proper sourcing for the content we provided, and that we were pretty much forced to leave out the most important parts anyway due to, again, lack of sourcing. It would be perfect if reliable sources described his involvement with Ray and his suicide, but without that, what would be the point in mentioning his name? His description in existing sources is not notable and I agree that it would fail ]. Maybe some news site will look back the events somewhere in the future. Let's hope. ] (]) 11:18, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
			::{{ping\|Prinsgezinde}} Understandable, but I would think it’s at least worth mentioning that Time Cube had another adherent (that is, apart from Gene Ray). Apparently Janczarski’s YouTube contributions are considered notable enough for IMDB (https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10919055/). ] (]) 10:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
			:::This is one of many reasons why IMdB does not meet WP's reliable source criteria. ] ]/] 15:48, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
			::::There are aspects of IMDB which are pretty reliable, especially cast lists. But being in IMDB does not necessarily qualify a given work as being notable under wikipedia rules. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 22:55, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

			== Agreement ==
			It appears that there is one statement by this Ray guy that everyone can agree on: "Ray asserted repeatedly and variously that the academic world had not taken Time Cube seriously." ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 22:55, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:39, 26 October 2024

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Time Cube article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17Auto-archiving period: 31 days

This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Websites: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Internet culture Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alternative views Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Time Cube is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 24, 2004	Articles for deletion	Kept
February 3, 2004	Articles for deletion	Kept
March 30, 2005	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
April 26, 2005	Articles for deletion	Kept
October 26, 2006	Articles for deletion	Kept
October 29, 2008	Articles for deletion	Kept
March 16, 2010	Articles for deletion	Kept
July 29, 2010	Articles for deletion	Kept
Current status: Former featured article candidate

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

The contents of the Gene Ray page were merged into Time Cube. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Time Cube. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Time Cube at the Reference desk.

doctor's degree

Does he really have a PhD? Couldn't find anything about it, just that he started to call himself Dr. in 2002. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:16b8:455b:cf00:c8bd:16d0:7f23:e322 (talk) 16:18, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Suicide of Richard Janczarski

This section does not include any mention of Janczarski commiting suicide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.162.80.73 (talk) 20:17, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

True. The reason is given here as an edit summary. --Hob Gadling (talk) 20:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

I've removed "Suicide of" from the heading as it's no longer applicable to the content. Schazjmd (talk) 20:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Help a Newbie Out

I made a few contributions to the page, mostly based on the past edit of Richard Janczarski's death being removed, but in return was mostly removed by a user named User:Schazjmd(I don't know how to link to names, hopefully what I did works). Hopefully he can help me out? I am new to wikipedia editing of course, and I understand why some of my edit's were removed, but I have a few questions. I hope I am typing this in the right place to even communicate this.

1. Why doesn't Fredrik Knudsen's documentary Down The Rabbit Hole on this topic not constitute as a source? In my view this would constitute as the greatest source outside of what is on the Cubic Awareness Online website/TimeCube website or their owners direct statements. If the documentary does constitute as a source, I'd like to know how to revise the edits I made to better suit this wikipage to better improve the accuracy of this article instead of just throwing everything from it out the window.

2. Richard Janczarski killed himself. This fact isn't really in dispute. I'd like to know why attempts to bring light of this significant event in TimeCubes history keep getting removed. So far it has just been "insignificant" source claims with both the Down The Rabbit Hole documentary and his gravestone. I understand just some random gravestone that could be his being removed, but this is definitely and not in dispute his gravestone.

A lot of TimeCube's history has gone unarchived, leading to these conflicts of not having any direct sources, but I am confused as why events that did take place and did happen to a definite degree are unable to be attributed to the TimeCube wikipage just because the evidence for them happening isn't retrievable, yet comments made in a school newspaper are somehow used as a proper source.

TL;DR Am a newbie, but want to better flesh out this article. Can someone help me out? UPDATED: Found reasons why that stuff was removed in earlier post, can it further be explained to me so I can fully understand and work around those imposed limitations? I just don't understand why it's so hard to express the fact that he died by suicide, which is important in relation to the article. Also, how can the Down The Rabbit Hole source be changed to better suit the claims made here? It feels like a complete waste just tossing it out because it says more than what it's being sourced for.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by ThyShyFly (talk • contribs) 21:54, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

ThyShyFly, content requires reliable, independent sources for verifiability (learn more at WP:RS). User-generated content sources like YouTube are not considered reliable (with limited exceptions, which Knudsen's video doesn't meet). This is an article about a specific website, so Janczarski's death isn't relevant unless there is a reliable source noting it and connecting it to TimeCube in some way. Schazjmd (talk) 22:08, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Richard Janczarski

A recent edit by user:Prinsgezinde has removed Richard Janczarski in his entirety from the article. He states, "None of this is sourced anyway. If we're not going to write about him committing suicide because there is no source for it, why mention him at all? There is no source for him."

Going back into the history, the whole Richard Janczarski part had two sources, one linking to one of his youtube videos and the other to a radio interview. Neither really supported anything they were sourced to.

Despite the lack of evidence, I personally think the removal of the Richard Janczarski section is disappointing, as he was a huge part of the TimeCube saga, I'd even go as far to say that he was more important than Dr. Jene Ray himself just due to Richard's website, CubicAwarenessOnline, really making it clear (at least as clear as TimeCube can be) what TimeCube is about. Currently, other wiki related websites are leagues above this article on wikipedia just due to them having more information with regards to TimeCube.

Here are some important links related to Richard Janczarski.

https://yadi.sk/d/t8cdVYIpjMEPn in this radio interview, Richard Janczarski admits he got kicked out of university but got re-enrolled because of TimeCube. The interviewer also uses the term "Cubicist" to describe people who believed in TimeCube. Also gives the background behind his "Second Wisist Human" title. http://web.archive.org/web/20200220173816/http://cubicao.tk/CubicAwarenessOnline This is an archive of the CubicAwarenessOnline website, describes TimeCube in its entirety, and was the website around the GraveyardoftheGods community. https://www.youtube.com/user/Pyramid0rz Richard Janczarski's official youtube account, has lots of TimeCube videos with two seperate movie projects on it.

Lots more links, these are just some I had handy. I just think Richard Janczarski's entire removal from the wikipage would be a disappointment. Want to see what other editors think though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThyShyFly (talk • contribs) 19:44, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is based on independent, reliable, published sources. Cubic Awareness is Janczarski's personal website which is neither independent nor reliable. Same goes for his Youtube channel. The radio interview is the only source that's not self-published, however it is publishing Janczarski's words verbatim with no fact-checking or analysis. Since coverage in reliable sources is nonexistent, this section fails the due weight requirement, –dlthewave ☎ 13:14, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Seconded. All of that may be of interest to true heads on this topic but, and I say this as someone with my username, Misplaced Pages is not a fan wiki. Just because information is of interest to a reader deep into a particular topic doesn't mean it needs to be added here, especially with the sort of references cited to include it. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 07:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Huh, Misplaced Pages didn't notify me of the mention like it usually does. Strange. Anyway, ThyShyFly, I fully get where you're coming from. The two issues are that there was a severe lack of proper sourcing for the content we provided, and that we were pretty much forced to leave out the most important parts anyway due to, again, lack of sourcing. It would be perfect if reliable sources described his involvement with Ray and his suicide, but without that, what would be the point in mentioning his name? His description in existing sources is not notable and I agree that it would fail WP:DUE. Maybe some news site will look back the events somewhere in the future. Let's hope. Prinsgezinde (talk) 11:18, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@Prinsgezinde: Understandable, but I would think it’s at least worth mentioning that Time Cube had another adherent (that is, apart from Gene Ray). Apparently Janczarski’s YouTube contributions are considered notable enough for IMDB (https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10919055/). Rovingrobert (talk) 10:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

This is one of many reasons why IMdB does not meet WP's reliable source criteria. DoctorJoeE /_Talk 15:48, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

There are aspects of IMDB which are pretty reliable, especially cast lists. But being in IMDB does not necessarily qualify a given work as being notable under wikipedia rules. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 22:55, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Agreement

It appears that there is one statement by this Ray guy that everyone can agree on: "Ray asserted repeatedly and variously that the academic world had not taken Time Cube seriously." ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 22:55, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Categories: