| Display title | Three Worlds Collide/Analysis |
| Default sort key | Three Worlds Collide/Analysis |
| Page length (in bytes) | 7,583 |
| Namespace ID | 0 |
| Page ID | 8100 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
| Counted as a content page | Yes |
| Number of subpages of this page | 0 (0 redirects; 0 non-redirects) |
| Edit | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Move | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Delete | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Page creator | prefix>Import Bot |
| Date of page creation | 21:27, 1 November 2013 |
| Latest editor | Gethbot (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 18:17, 1 February 2015 |
| Total number of edits | 5 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 180 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | One of the commonest reactions to "Three Worlds Collide" is, "Wait, I thought the 'Normal Ending' was better than the 'True Ending'!" What makes this surprising, rather than simple Values Dissonance, is that Eliezer Yudkowsky is generally considered a good writer, and yet the authorial intent of the story is undermined if the former is more compelling than the latter. Why does the story fail in this fashion for a large contingent of readers? |