Talk:A Song of Stone

Fair use rationale for Image:ASongofStone.png
Image:ASongofStone.png 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

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 17:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Lotta subjective, unsourced nonsense in this article
From the personal review that pretends to be an article: "With her easy and practical egalitarianism, and her soldiers with names like "Psycho", "Karma" and "Deathwish", Loot, the bloodstained insurgent is often seen as the most likeable character."

Huh? Often seen by WHOM? Is there a source? I don't see her as the most likeable character by a long stretch.

More sophomoric nonsense: "Stylistically, in its use of an unlikeable unreliable narrator, the book resembles..."

Unlikeable? Unreliable? Where do you get that from? This is an encyclopedia, not a teenage journal for you to publish your own insipid book reviews. No wonder so many find wikipedia doubtful.

There also needs to be a spoiler warning. 4.231.246.6 17:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Heywood Jablomey


 * Well, it's a wiki, so the beauty of it is you can feel free to improve it yourself. We no longer use spoiler warnings. --John 17:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * "When they return, Abel almost shoots the Lieutenant and there is a violent and nihilistic ending." It's there a reason why the "violent and nihilistic ending" isn't summarised? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.65.27.236 (talk) 15:28, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

First person- second person
The book is NOT written entirely in the second person- it is written from the first person perspective of Abel, with some reference to Morgan's actions, mostly when when she is in his direct view. I will change the sentence to note this. 123.200.198.152 (talk) 09:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

OR
Please do not revert edits based on the assumption, that they are unsubstantiated, especially when the argument is given with the edit. I edited the second part of the article, because "there is NO criticism and NO word on literary significance in this section, and there is basically NO source, making this OR". This is according to WP guidelines and not vandalism. 95.91.126.119 (talk) 16:30, 19 October 2022 (UTC)