Talk:Inherent Vice

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.

Copyright query

The extract from the novel has been published in the Penguin Books Summer 2009 catalogue http://booksellers.dk.com/static/pdf/penguinpress-summer09.pdf to advertise the novel; accurate citation of the excerpt conforms to the Acceptable use:Text clause of the Wikipedia Fair Use policy.Abaca (talk) 04:38, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFC allows quotations of text in certain circumstances, including "to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea." But in any case, it is specific on the point that "Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited." --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No point seems to be illustrated by this excerpt, and so for that reason I'm deleting it. No claim is made that it illustrates his writing style, and I question whether his style is in any event sufficiently illustrated by the quote. The claim is further undermined by reprinting in the final sentence a line of publisher's blurb. I would expect a very compelling fair use rationale before the excerpt was reinserted. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And to rebut in advance anticipated argument from Abaca, if you wish to make use of a quotation in the article, I suggest that there must be an explicit reason specified in the article text. Fair use should not be inferred. In this instance, we are not in a position to judge whether a publisher's excerpt is representative of anything. Nor are we able to do other than infer that the publisher is suggesting that the passage is representative of the novel. The whole thing is just a too tenuous and slender argument on which to hang someone else's copyright. Neither does the article suffer from the absence of the excerpt. Interested readers can be pointed at the online source. I'd be happy if you'd save some time now and point me to other examples of the plundering of the penguin catalogue within wikiedia. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

Jim, don't you think the addition of your last edit tips the paragraph to be overwhelmingly positive? Almost all the reviews cited are positive with only one sentence denoted to the negative at the very end. Malvenue (talk) 14:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've made an edit per your comment, substituting the more notable reviewer/source.Jimintheatl (talk) 15:11, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it reads better now. Malvenue (talk) 03:31, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't the reviews go under the plot summary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.249.48.177 (talk) 13:27, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

dead review link

the college hill review link takes you to a pornographic site 23.240.255.123 (talk) 23:45, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]