Talk:Richard Bachman

Untitled

The link became undeniable when a persistent bookstore clerk couldn't believe that Bachman and King were not one and the same, and eventually located publisher's records at the Library of Congress naming King as the author of one of Bachman's novels.

That persistent bookstore clerk's name is Steve Brown. That probably should be mentioned in the article. I'm not sure how best to edit the article so if someone could... Here's one website that explains how it happened. Not sure if the website should be used as a reference cite or placed in the links section.. http://users.cybercity.dk/~nmb21186/aboutbachman.htm - --Nechevo 15:21, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

By the time of Bachman's death of "cancer of the pseudonym", King was working on Misery and planned to release it as a Bachman book.

Is it just me, or does the above make little sense? Is that second of meant to be there? -- Sam

I understand it to mean "By the time Bachman died of cancer, ...". - wr 13-dec-2005

I think we should merge this page into Stephen King -- Tarquin 12:24 Nov 4, 2002 (UTC)

I agree. Tuf-Kat

Disagree, but since that thread is three years old I guess it's not going to happen anyway. -Litefantastic 18:47, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

There is a picture of Bachman in Thinner. Who is that guy, anyway? -Litefantastic 18:47, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, did Bachman's books sell or didn't they? Having this article say that King wanted to find out if his work would sell without his name, and then not say if it did, is a bit of a cliffhanger... --Malathion 16:20, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

They sold well considering the extremely limited promotion they received, and running man was made into a major motion picture staring ahh-nold. so I'd say yeah they sold.

Origin

This section is absolutely incorrect; the reference doesn't even verify it.

I've been reading King for 20+ years now, and the only explanation I ever heard about the orogins of Richard Bachman is the one listed on King's website; ironically the one the reference refers to: that in that day an author could only publish one book a year, it was felt that an author couldn't create quality work writing faster than that, so King created a pseudonym to double his production. Trying to see if his novels would sell under a different name doesn't fit into it anywhere.

Unless someone can provide a reference for this I'll be changing this to the referenced origin. Gene S. Poole 00:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

That sounds like an important change--go for it. If there is a source for an alternative explanation, it can be added in later. Nareek 02:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

actually i've heard that the first four original bachman books were written by king pre-carrie and he wanted to release them, so it wasn't like he doubled his productivity, as he was releasing mostly old work.

George Stark

King mentioined in one of his collections (everything's eventual i believe) that he planned for bachman to have his own pseudonym, george stark, who wrote a novel called "my pretty pony" which he later edited down to a short story and released under his own name, stark was also the name of the pseudonym that came to life in the dark half. Can someone please encyclopeida-ize this and add to the article?

Whose picture is that?

Has the identity of the person whose picture was used for Bachman ever been established? Just curious. -- Pennyforth 12:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RichardBachman.jpg

Image:RichardBachman.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 insure 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Running Man plagiarism

I deleted a paragraph of allegations of plagiarism attributed to Martin Olson that didn't have any citations. Plagiarism is a very serious charge, and Wikipedia shouldn't support unfounded claims never tested in court or even in public. (A man on the run from killers in a televised game show is not, in my opinion, a huge leap from "The Most Dangerous Game" a story known to virtually adventure writer). Moreover, any legitimate discussion of plagiarism of The Running Man belongs in that article; not here. --Tysto 14:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RichardBachman.jpg

Image:RichardBachman.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 insure 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) 04:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Bachman Road?

maybe a relationship to bachman-road in the silent hill franchise should be pointed out... anybody knows something more about it?

--93.196.61.65 (talk) 22:06, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I doubt it. Bachman is a common last name (I usually see it spelled "Bachmann" though). 98.198.83.12 (talk) 08:20, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

about the pseudonym

Currently the article reads: "The originally selected pseudonym was the name of King's maternal grandfather; but at the last moment King changed it to "Richard Bachman," in tribute to crime author Donald E. Westlake's long-running pseudonym Richard Stark. The surname Stark was later used in King's novel The Dark Half, in which an author's malevolent pseudonym, "George Stark", comes to life. The surname was in honor of Bachman–Turner Overdrive, a rock and roll band King was listening to at the time."

I find this messy in several areas:

1. what was "the originally selected pseudonym"? The exact same name as King's maternal grandfather? What was the change? The Christian name only (Richard) or what? What is the grandfather's name and why was it left out of the paragraph?
2. connecting "George Stark" to "Richard Bachman" feels pretty anecdotal. Even if it should be considered relevant, it mustn't be original research and so where is the reference?
3. The last sentence probably references "Bachman" (and not Stark!) but I can't be sure. The language here can definitely be improved. Again, a reference is needed.

CapnZapp (talk) 19:24, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Merge discussion?

The top of the article says there's been an ongoing merge discussion since March, but the link does not lead to such a thing.208.54.70.246 (talk) 02:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC)