Talk:Northern Lights (Pullman novel)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2019 and 8 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Samanthadies.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:25, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

"Golden Compass"
Should perhaps a search for "Golden Compass" redirect to this page? Many American fans will probably use that term in the search.
 * The Golden Compass already did point here, and I added Golden Compass, so I think that should do what you suggest. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 15:01, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

Steampunk novel?
You have reversed a set of edits of mine related to the claim that the novel can be classified as steampunk. So, I'm starting a discussion here! Your arguments were:
 * 1) That the reference is not a reliable source
 * 2) That reference makes a steampunk claim only for London

On the first point, I disagree, because as:

published in the The Internet Review of Science Fiction is sufficiently notable to have a Wikipedia page. I accept that notability is a surrogate for reliability; are there arguments against it?

On the second point, I also disagree, on the grounds that while the text of the review does give only London as an example, it classifies the whole book as steampunk, specifically stating "The first novel, Northern Lights, is also a bona fide Steampunk novel"

- Tidar, L. 2005 .

Additionally, I can see additional non-reliable sources which class is as steampunk, including a ranking site.

Therefore, I feel that the claim should be reinstated, as it an opinion expressed in a review from a notable source with no evidence that it isn't reliable. Any objections? Klbrain (talk) 12:46, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The thing about genres is that they're pretty flexible; you can probably find someone somewhere, for example, claiming that HDM contains horror elements, or romance. It's also easy to overburden articles with multiple genres; film articles are common victims of this, with films described as "horror-comedy fantasy satire" or other such concoctions. We should only include genres that can be backed up with multiple, reliable sources. Besides, HDM isn't really known as a steampunk series so its inclusion here is a distraction. Popcornduff (talk) 12:54, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Brief reply, I removed the specific description, which relates solely to the 'London' element. London is part of one chapter of NL if I remember correctly. I believe I left the 'category', since it is sometimes seen thus. I think a better source is needed to include text that NL is in any significant sense 'steampunk', that the novel is MAINLY seen as being in that category. As PCD says, HDM has elements of many genres. Pincrete (talk) 15:32, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The characters refer to "elementary particles" and "the four fundamental forces" and "the collapse of the wave function".  These are all twentieth-century concepts from quantum mechanics and implies that their science is on the same level as ours, though technology evolved differently.  (Zeppelins instead of airplanes)   How can it be "steampunk" ?  2001:558:6011:1:11B7:55ED:94CC:AC2C (talk)
 * Some sources do refer to it having Steampunk elements - but that is of course very different from it generally being regarded as a steampunk novel. It may have elements of many genres. Pincrete (talk) 07:47, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Golden Compass (film) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 21:45, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

That said, there's no mention of the book in this page, even though there's a mention of a video game based off the movie. 31.200.186.191 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:23, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Banned throughout Ontario RC schools ?
Re this edit, What the source actually says is:

Removed, but later returned to the library shelves at dozens of schools in the publicly funded Halton, Ontario, Canada, Catholic School District (2007) despite that the books were challenged as being "written by an atheist where the characters and text are anti-God, anti-Catholic, and anti-religion." The book and two other Pullman titles from the Dark Materials trilogy were pulled from public display for review, but are available to students upon request. The publicly funded Calgary, Alberta, Canada, Catholic School District (2007) returned the book to its library shelves two months after ordering its removal. Detractors accused the book of having antireligious content. Similar concerns prompted the Catholic League, a Roman-Catholic anti-defamation organization in the U.S., to urge parents to boycott a movie version of the book that was released in December 2007. Challenged at the Conkwright Middle School in Winchester, Ky. (2007) because the main character drinks wine and ingests poppy with her meals, and the book presents an anti- Christian doctrine. Pulled from the St. John Neumann Middle School and Lourdes High School in Oshkosh, Wis. (2007) because of concerns about what critics call its "anti-Christian message." Challenged at the Shallowater Middle School in Lubbock, Tex. (2007) because of the book's "anti-religious messages." Pulled from the library shelves at Ortega Middle School in Alamosa, Colo. (2007) for what critics regard as the book's anti-religious views. District officials later returned the book to circulation. Retained by the publicly funded Dufferin-Peel Catholic School District in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada (2008) with a sticker on the inside cover telling readers "representations of the church in this novel are purely fictional," and are not reflective of the real Roman Catholic Church or the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I'm not sure that a handful of schools taking the book on the shelves is noteworthy, but if so, the account should be accurate.Pincrete (talk) 11:07, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Panserbjørne
Could the Panserbjørne / armoured bears issue please please please be discussed here and consensus reached, without further back-and-forth editing of the article? At least if there's a discussion and a consensus then there is something to refer back to in edit summaries. The current situation is a royal pain and makes me want to unwatch the article as the piecemeal editing of one word at a time is just excruciating. I don't even mind that much which way it goes, though I do have a slight preference for Panserbjørne-first – my real beef is with the repeated edits and the lack of discussion. Let's please get consensus here and then respect it. With best wishes to all DBaK (talk) 07:59, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: I have shortened the subsection title from Panserbjørne / armoured bears - consensus not edit war please? to Panserbjørne only to facilitate its easier reuse. DBaK (talk) 11:34, 4 July 2019 (UTC)