Talk:The Fifth Sacred Thing

Novels Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

What's fifth?

A recent editor changed the page to include spirit as the fifth sacred thing. This isn't quite right. While spirit is mentioned as the fifth sacred thing several times in the book (including one very early mention when the four powers are first introduced), it turns out at the end that the true fifth sacred thing is slightly different.

With regard to spoilage or not, when I first wrote the article, I deliberately avoided putting in spoilage (including the identity of the true fifth sacred thing) but I'm not firmly rooted on this approach.

Atlant 11:25, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All integral plot elements can (and should) be included on Wikipedia. While I can certainly see the point in hiding it so as to make the article safe reading without the use of a spoiler tag, that isn't the convention of this site (see any other book or movie description). Sarge Baldy 22:12, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Book review

I've added a mini review of one of the book's themes - its handling of non-violence. I avoided plot spoilers - the unsatisfactory ending that betrays the non-violent ethos is, of course, the instigation of an armed and violent mutiny amongst the occupying troops. Using violence to defeat violence, as they say. Maybe I'll put it in the body as there's no policy against spoilers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Steve3742 (talk • contribs).

Unfortunately, it's all WP:OR and WP:POV. I'm going to remove it.

Atlant 15:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know I don't understand that criticism. Book and film reviews are always going to be WP:OR and WP:POV. This includes a lot of the other stuff on this very article. I've put it backSteve3742 12:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, here on Wikipedia, neither you nor I get to write the review. If you find an accepted critic writing this, you can cite it and include some of it in the article. But until then, it can't stay.

Atlant 12:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why link to the The Gate to Women's Country?

I noticed the See Also link to Sheri Tepper's book, The Gate to Women's Country. Why? That book is not mentioned in this article in any way, and this book is not mentioned in the article for the Tepper book. I do not think either book refers to the other, does it? There is no indication for why there is a link. Shouldn't there be some reason that the reader can understand by reading one article or the other? (I put a similar note on the Talk page for The Gate to Women's Country.) Sylvia A (talk) 07:02, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]