Talk:Veniss Underground

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Horror

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Novels 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.

Veniss is not "new weird"

Why and/or by whom was Veniss disignated "new weird"? I think this novel would be better classified as "SF" or "Science Fiction". The discussion on the "new weird" page seems to support this assessment. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jpwrunyan (talk • contribs) 16:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

no more new weird entry

Since I think no one is paying any attention or cares. I made a few minor edits to this page. The most important in my mind being to remove the statement that this book is "new weird". Science fiction, although perhaps a broad term, is at least more accurate.--Jpwrunyan 05:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:JeffVandermeer VenissUnderground.jpg

Image:JeffVandermeer VenissUnderground.jpg 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 this Wikipedia article 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. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 09:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plot section needs to be split

It just consists of one long paragraph. I'd split it myself, but I might decide to read the book one day and don't want to risk it being spoiled for me, so could someone who has read it, or is unlikely to ever have an interest in reading it, please do this job? (Edit: Sorry to neglect to add my signature for three years!)--Thylacine24 (talk) 11:38, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]