Talk:Lo!

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 articles

Paranormal

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Essay[edit]

This article reads like an essay, not encyclopedic at all. What should be done with it? --Kukuman 08:54, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

First cut it back somewhat, to see what a concise version would look like. Charles Matthews 09:58, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It's an analysis of the book. What is wrong with that, Kukuman?

General analyses of subjects are not encyclopedic, and therefore are not wikipedian; summary of general analyses by specific individuals are more the name of the game. "It's easy to see why" is a completely POV statement, for instance. --Chr.K. 02:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History Channel...[edit]

So I'm watching the star trek special on the history channel, and they usually put little facts in before a comercial break. One fact was that Lo! was the first mentioning of the word "teleportation" is there any way to site or confirm this?

Read the biography of Charles Fort by science-fiction author and Hugo Award winner Damon Knight. Eric Frank Russell also mentions this. Fort is well-known in science fiction circles as the coiner of the word teleportation.SageMab (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2007 (UTC)SageMab[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Lo2004.jpg[edit]

Image:Lo2004.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 00:54, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does Lo! come from "lo' and behold!"?[edit]

After reading the whole article, I still don't know about the origin of the work's title. 92.230.1.9 (talk) 07:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC) -andy[reply]

Princess Caraboo[edit]

According to Wikipedia Princess Caraboo was understood to be a scam well before Fort's time. Therefore it seems odd for the article to cite the character. If Fort argued in the book Caraboo was not a scam then that should be put into context.--72.173.160.50 (talk) 06:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]