This article is ratedStart-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

NovelsMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide tonovels,novellas,novelettes andshort stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to thegeneral Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale. Women writersMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofwomen writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale.

Although I wrote this article in the format of a review, I intend to show that this book goes far beyond the scope of a novel, that it challenges our commonly held beliefs, and offers in their place a very real alternate way of approaching reality. If Wikipedia is going to mention an author, I feel that giving a challenging glimpse into the work of that person is wholly appropriate. Objecting to this article on the grounds of Wikipedia not being Amazon.com seems petty to the point of absurdity. On such grounds, the scope of Wikipedia can be reduced to a minimalist version of pedantic trivia, such as offering sterile lists of author's names and birthdates and no informative content at all.

I could change this article into a discussion of Joanna Russ, mentioning the book more obliquely. However I have not yet met Ms Russ, and know little about her except what I may surmise from reading her published work. Since this is the case, and I feel making a statement about her importance and the importance of this book is significant, I think the article I wrote is the most honest and straightforward approach, and I feel Wikipedia should have room for it.

Ymach902:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Unfortunately, you have approached the article in a way that goes against Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Please review, in particular, the policyWP:NOR - "No original research". You may also find it helpful to look at how articles on other novels are approached on Wikipedia. Essays and book reviews are not allowed on Wikipedia, pure and simple. You can cite reviews and essays in the dicussion of the book, but you cannot write an essay yourself otherwise NOR applies. The deletion request is based upon how the article was originally written, not necessarily upon whether the book itself is notable, though a guideline on such notability is being considered, (seeWP:BK). From what I've heard, this novel is more than notable enough to justify an article, but it needs to be written per Wikipedia requirements.23skidoo18:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The current outline of the plot is very thin and vague, having just read the book I'd like to replace it with something that describes the events of the book a little more coherently. Does anyone object to this?Euchrid (talk)02:34, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Start-Class novel articles
• Mid-importance novel articles
• WikiProject Novels articles
• Start-Class Women writers articles
• Mid-importance Women writers articles
• WikiProject Women articles
• WikiProject Women writers articles

• Talk pages with comments before the first section