Talk:Ice (Dukaj novel)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lod (cover).jpg

Image:Lod (cover).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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:04, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Critical reception

The paragraph beginning with "Wojciech Orliński in his review[4]..." is in my opinion out of place - having a Ludlum-like plot is not necessarily an advantage for an s-f book (and as far as "Lód" is concerned, I think its plot is rather sloppy and if it has anything "Ludlum" about it, then it's rather in a negative sense). Moreover, IMHO Orliński is completely wrong in the angle from which he views the book (he focuses almost entirely on "Polish-historical" aspects of the novel and says next to nothing about other concepts such as many-valued logic, alternative physics, religious stuff etc.), so regarding an inaccurate review as "critical reception" is not the best thing to do in a paragraph that's somehow intended to praise the book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.26.73.236 (talk) 13:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's what Orliński states. There are not many sources (reviews) to go around; feel free to expand the section with other sources, as far as I know his review is the only one out there so far.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 12:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Title

I don't think we should use the English title as the title of the article if a book hasn't been officially translated yet. Ausir (talk) 12:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

There has been no consensus on this in the past; I will not object to a move nor will I support it.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 12:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

English translation is OK per WP:NC-BK#Title translations. Visor (talk) 00:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC)