Talk:Operators and Things

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Operators and Things 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 Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is the 7,000,000th Wikipedia article in the English-language Wikipedia.

7-millionth article – Operators and Things

6-millionth article – Maria Elise Turner Lauder

5-millionth article – Persoonia terminalis

4-millionth article – Ezbet El Borg

3-millionth article – Beate Eriksen

2-millionth article – El Hormiguero

Millionth article – Jordanhill railway station

For earlier article milestones, see {{Hundred thousand milestones}}.

7th millionth article!

That's a great achievement. Congratulations to all wikipedia users who made every article before this, and congratulations to anybody writing and editing articles for this free, huge internet encyclopedia. To 8 million and beyond! Andreaslagoud (talk) 16:37, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

cool YourLocalZenith talk 16:58, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats CaptianEek for making history with the 7,000,000th article! EGGBUTTEATERLOL (talk) 21:40, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Therapyisgood created this article, not CaptainEek. Mz7 (talk) 23:03, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oh EGGBUTTEATERLOL (talk) 23:50, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Replace anonymous with pseudonymous?

While talking with RoySmith on some ideas for some DYK hooks for this article, the question came up on if the use of wikt:anonymous in the lede and rest of the article should be replaced with wikt:pseudonymous. The author, known under the pseudonym Barbara O'Brien, is also anonymous, hence we know who the author, but by a pen name and not the legal identity outside of their pen name. A small issue, but I'd still like to ask other folks what they think about the terminology. Courtesy ping to @Therapyisgood as original author(congratulations!), though open to feedback from any interested editors. PixDeVl (T | C | G) 23:10, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would keep "anonymous". I feel that "pseudonymous" carries the implication that the real identity is in fact known despite the use of a pen name (e.g. Dr. Seuss), whereas "anonymous" makes it clear that the author's identity is unknown. If this is controversial, then perhaps a solution is to avoid using either term and state directly that the author's identity is unknown: Operators and Things: The Inner Life of a Schizophrenic is an 1958 autobiographical account of a woman's onset of and recovery from schizophrenia. The book was written under the pen name Barbara O'Brien, whose identity is unknown. Mz7 (talk) 23:26, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think "pseudonymous" is quite correct here: the book was written under a pseudonym. It is easy to lean towards "anonymous" as we conventionally associate pseudonymous writers with having written multiple works and thus attaching an identity to that pseudonym, but that is not strictly necessary. For the purposes of a hook I don't really feel there is a meaningful difference, though. – Isochrone (talk) 09:53, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would actually argue O'Brien has established "an identity", given we know there was communication to and from her in relation to the book somehow, as the article states the last time anyone had heard from O'Brien was in 1976, when she wrote an additional chapter for a new version of the book. This may be something worth me looking into the sources for. PixDeVl (T | C | G) 11:33, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting discussion. In my view, it is both (as previously stated) but which word best helps the reader in situating the author's identity? I would say that has to be anonymous, as when I think of pseudonymous author, I invariably think of someone whose name either was always known but wrote under a pen name (Mark Twain, Stan Lee, or Dr. Seuss), or someone who wrote anonymously at first (1. Currer Bell, 2. Richard Bachman) but whose identity was later discovered (1. Charlotte Brontë, 2. Stephen King). The term anonymous works better if there has to be a choice, but we could also add an additional sentence to § Author and background directly addressing the issue, e.g., "The author's identity is not known [except to her publisher/shrink/etc.]". Mathglot (talk) 21:11, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Anonymous" sounds fine then (but I'd still prefer wording around it, as we currently do in the lead). It seems the new edition has some information but it'll take a month to arrive here in the UK! – Isochrone (talk) 21:57, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like the best course of action to me, maybe clarification in some other areas, and I’d probably word it as The author's identity is not publicly known or the like. PixDeVl (T | C | G) 00:43, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sent off to DYKN with "anonymous", see below. PixDeVl (T | C | G) 22:16, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the Nashville Banner said Operators and Things would both interest laymen and impress professionals due to its thorough examination of the unconscious self? Source: https://www.newspapers.com/article/nashville-banner/172319537/
- ALT1: ... that a book described as "an absorbing account of life in the dream world of a schizophrenic" was written by an anonymous author? Source: "Operators and Things: The Inner Life of a Schizophrenic". Publishers Weekly. Vol. 207, no. 5. F. Leypoldt. February 3, 1975. p. 44.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Hillbilly Thomists
- Comment: Tried my best to come up with some real interesting hooks for article 7 mil, would love other suggestions from the current text or if more is added in the future. ALT1 I was a bit unsure about the wording of anonymous vs pseudonymous, but per discussion at Talk:Operators and Things#Replace anonymous with pseudonymous? landed on this. ALT1 is also linked to an offline source, I've asked the author on their talkpage for a scan or equivalent of the source, given the shifting winds I see in regards to AGF sources.

Created by Therapyisgood (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

PixDeVl (T | C | G) 21:59, 31 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]

@PixDeVl: You can just google the quote from Publishers Weekly and look on Google Books and find it that way. Also it's on the back of the 2011 version, I believe, or at the very least it's on the Amazon.com page for the 2011 publishing. Therapyisgood (talk) 01:08, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Therapyisgood: found and verified, thank you! Never thought to just search it funny enough, I queried the whole citation and even combed the Internet Archives a bit for the issue. Cheers! --PixDeVl (T | C | G)
How about something like '...that the author of the 1958 autobiographical account (memoir?) Operators and Things, describing a schizophrenic author's experiences with "operators", has never been identified?' or even simply '...that the anonymous 1958 autobiographical account Operators and Things describes a woman's onset and recovery from schizophrenia, aided by "operators"?'

I like this "has never been identified" version, that's a proper hook for a "did you know". Mateussf (talk) 11:16, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]