Talk:Silver John

Resembles Johnny Cash??

The article states, "John; who resembles a young Johnny Cash". I've read most, if not all of Wellman's published "John" stories, and I can't say that I ever got the impression of any implied resemblence to Johnny Cash from them. Seems to me that someone has inserted their own personal interpretetion of the character into this description. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.249 (talk) 22:25, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree. I've removed it. NewYorkActuary (talk) 08:43, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

inaccurate dates

"Silver John" stories show up in the Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction before 1960. "Vandy Vandy" in particular is in issue 3, volume 4, from 1953. 100.15.127.199 (talk) 01:10, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

plagiarism or quotation

The entire first section, Silver John#John, is almost or entirely identical to the descriptive text of http://www.haffnerpress.com/book/the-complete-john-the-balladeer/. I can't say for sure without further examination which came first, but I'd bet dollars to donuts the publisher's page is the original. Thnidu (talk) 01:30, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

The publisher's page begins:

John, whose last name is never revealed, is a wandering singer who carries a guitar strung with strings of pure silver. He is a veteran of the Korean War and served in the U.S. Army as a sharpshooter (in the novel After Dark, he mentions that his highest rank was PFC). In his travels, he frequently encounters creatures and superstitions from the folk tales and superstitions of the mountain people. Though John has no formal education, he is self-taught, highly intelligent and widely read; it is implied that his knowledge of occult and folk legendarium is of Ph.D level. Thnidu (talk) 01:37, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

The article apparently was plagiarized [|from the start]. Thnidu (talk) 01:46, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

The press site in question says "adapted from Wikipedia", which suggests it appeared here first. However, the section is uncited as well as written in a promotional tone, so it should be rewritten anyway. casualdejekyll 12:43, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, some of the "plagiarism" was present in the first edit in 2005, whereas the publisher's blurb is for a collection that hasn't even appeared yet. I think it's clear that they drew the wording from us rather than vice versa. Deor (talk) 16:51, 8 December 2022 (UTC)