I'll take a look. I loved this book when i was a kid! I will make straightforward changes as I go and jot queries below. Please revert if I accidentally change the meaning.
Cas Liber (
talk·contribs)
20:35, 14 August 2019 (UTC)reply
Thanks for reviewing this! Loved this book as well :)
I think that up the top of the Summary section, you need to state that it is a pretend/quasi guide-book or something that impresses that it is a pseudo-factual work somehow.
Cox's review was extremely negative, but subsequent reviews were highly positive. - do we have any idea why Cox was so negative?
The article doesn't specify and I think the original review could be hard to track down since it was on a radio show? I'll look around and see if I can find something.
Ichthyovenator (
talk)
22:20, 14 August 2019 (UTC)reply
Can you see if anyone else mentioned it as their inspiration for something?
I'll look around and add anything I can find. Naish's article implies the book inspired parts of the show Primeval but I don't think that can be added without confirmation from anyone involved with Primeval itself.
Ichthyovenator (
talk)
22:20, 14 August 2019 (UTC)reply
That's just about everything I can find in terms of inspiration. Obviously there are countless more examples within personal art projects littered across the internet but those can't really be cited without a seconday source and the article already specifies that the book inspired and essentially founded the "speculative evolution community". I did add some more details on the 2018 edition, that the book was translated into a number of languages, and that there was a 1987 exhibition based on the book. I also split "legacy" into "legacy" and "adaptations". It would be great to find some original 1981/1982 reviews of the book but I haven't found any.
Ichthyovenator (
talk)
20:20, 15 August 2019 (UTC)reply