Talk:Mad scientist

Removal of unreferenced original research

I have read the section with interest, but unfortunately it considerably violates wikipedia rules in many respects. I will not going to analyze each and every phrase: there is simply no basis for discussion: I am not going to criticize opinions of the wikipedia who wrote this text. I will only discuss interpretations of sources used, which are none. Just follow wikipedia rules, please, and we shall talk. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:20, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Just a hint of the problems with the removed text: why on Earth Victor Frankenstein is mad? Staszek Lem (talk) 20:24, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Well I'll do though. I'll leave up or add the citation needed template to all remaining parts. I'm not sure why people would remove such a large, essential and well-written part of an article - why not improve it instead? Those citation needed notes also haven't been up for more than a month. Not sure why one wouldn't consider Victor Frankenstein (as portrayed) to be mad?! --Fixuture (talk) 20:33, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I know that VF is commonly described a proverbial "mad scientist". But wikipedia article does a bad job to explain why. Neither our definition of MadSci nor description of VF provide matching clues. For example, "cross boundaries that ought not to be crossed" would make Galileo and Copernicus mad scientists (heretics, weren't they?). Staszek Lem (talk) 20:40, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

That's a reason to add content and not to remove it though (and indeed I too think that the info is way to sparse on that). It's "boundaries that ought not to be crossed" (both as a concept and also in their particular flavor of e.g. "creating" life) which are highlighted as being existent in the novel & film/s and brought to the public mind. It's not saying that such boundaries exist and that they were crossed in the novel but that these were highlighted/established and crossed in the context of the novel.

Relevant for a better description are: Playing God (ethics) & obsession as described in Victor Frankenstein#Characterization. --Fixuture (talk) 21:23, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

It was over half year now. Sorry, I am removing the stuff again. This is basically an unreferenced essay, with arbitrary picks and dubious statements. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:07, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mad scientist. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040628212818/http://pcasacas.org/SPC/spcissues/22.1/hoppenstand.html to http://pcasacas.org/SPC/spcissues/22.1/hoppenstand.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040405043242/http://www.plosbiology.org/plosonline/?request=get-document to http://www.plosbiology.org/plosonline/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.0020279

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:21, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde

Why isn't this included? It would seem to be one of the first prototypes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.210.190.252 (talk) 19:30, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Are there literary critics who describe this as a case of mad scientist? Wikipedia requires all information to come from reliable sources: See WP:CITE. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:44, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Article needs brings massively up-to-date

Mad scientists that spring to mind include: Dr. Octopus, Dr. No, Egon in Ghostbusters: there need to be secondary sources for these which should be quite easy. Generally the article is about 50 years out-of-date and eneds some love. The article also needs to look at comics, film and video games rather than just film. 08:55, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Should add a section for animated mad scientists as well (especially considering the stereotype image is also that of a cartoon character). Notable ones that come to mind are Rick Sanchez, Professor Farnsworth and Professor Frink. Ozmoos (talk) 22:47, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Fraust

wouldn't Fraust who was described as being mad as could be due to his fears for his sole and his desire to learn everything of every topic be considered an early prototype? seems odd as science fiction credit Fraust as a origin of genre for this reason so seeing him not on list about what he is supposed claim for in other articles is odd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.167.226.87 (talk) 06:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)