Talk:Charles Logan (author)
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Dubious connection with recent book.
[edit]Referring to this:
As of recently, Logan published their latest book This Is The Moment of Our Creation on a blog post. A book about scientific findings, focusing on astronomy, cosmology and meta physics.
I have no idea what this is about, and I cannot say conclusively that this book is or is not written by the same Charles Logan as the one this article is about. But I have read "Shipwreck", and I corresponded with the auothor and his daughter briefly a while ago, and I can only I am suspicious. I know gut feelings are not a basis for saying on Wikipedia that something is either true or it is not - but when I visit the link for this book "This is the Moment of Our Creation", I can only say it doesn't smell right - and I have serious doubts as to whether this is by the same Charles Logan.
I have no idea who added the information about this, nor the basis on which they linked it with the "Shipwreck" Charles Logan. I am tempted to remove the reference as being, if not incorrect (which I cannot assert), but as unfounded and unreferenced - in other words, whoever added it did not establish clearly that this is by the same author and not another Charles Logan. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that the author of this book is a different Charles Logan, with both "Charles" and "Logan" being reasonably common names.
However, I will just note it here for wiser heads than mine to decide. Where does the burden of proof lie in Wikipedia? Does it work similarly to the burden of proof in science, which always lies with the person making a positive claim, rather than on anyone else to disprove the claim?
And, please... "Logan published 'their' latest book"? Charles Logan is a man, not an indeterminate androgynous, genderless entity. He is a man, has a daughter, etc. In Wikipedia now, do we now assume that any person is a "their" rather than a "him" or "her"? Or do we ascribe less usual genders, pronouns, etc. only once we have information that this is applicable to the individual being discussed?M.J.E. (talk) 05:53, 7 January 2025 (UTC)