Talk:Q (novel)

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.

Christianity: Anabaptist Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Anabaptist work group (assessed as Low-importance).

[Untitled] edit

re the MQR review of Q, the [*] note contains a broken link. Just in case dr Jost sees this comment. - Anon

I don't understand why, of all the reviews listed below, this one is first among equals, the only one with a comment. Is there any logic to this? - Flavell

equal treatment of reviews edit

Having read the review by David Liss, it is actually the inclusion of this line in the article that strikes me as "unnecessary and", I suspect, "self-referential."13:30, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

NovelsWikiProject edit

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I think this thing of "rating" the "importance" of a book is utterly ridiculous. Who decides whether a book is of "high", "medium" or "low importance"? A self-appointed bunch of wannabe literati? And according to what criteria? I smell a stench of cultural discrimination... Leobot 08:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:Paperbackq big.jpg edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Image:Paperbackq big.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) 16:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Add topic