Talk:An Unsuitable Job for a Woman

Novels: Crime Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Crime task force.

Women writers Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spoiler alert[edit]

This should have some kind of spoiler alert, since it tells the whole story, but I don't know how to insert it. I've just read the book and am glad I didn't read this article before. --Eduarodi (talk) 04:27, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spoiler warnings aren't considered appropriate for Wikipedia -- see WP:Spoiler. As far as I know, the general concept is that people come here for information and they should get as much of it as possible. Accounting4Taste:talk 06:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well then, I will never read a comment on a film or book from Wikipedia, before I've seen or read it. I wonder though if people know about this policy. I've been around for some time, and this is news to me... By the way, can you read Spanish? It is interesting that the Spanish Wikipedia does warn about spoilers: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Revelaci%C3%B3n_de_la_trama --Eduarodi (talk) 06:03, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment[edit]

Does there exist no other review or criticism of the book- now fifty years old- save Barzun's, which is basically entirely negative? A balance could usefully be struck with a less unilaterally hostile view.

Year of Publication[edit]

The infobox says 1977, the article says 1972. Which is it? VenomousConcept (talk) 00:30, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]