Talk:Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman

Some Problems with the Plot Summary

Whilst it is a nice partial summary, there is no direct linkage that I can see between the Nomad's Goddess and St Leibowitz. Given the title and content, this rather vital information should be present. Second, IIRC, there is an indication of how the current Pope is back in New Rome at the time of World War Last. This, too should be present. Had I my copy of the book to hand, I would be taking care of these items, but alas!, this, too is packed. Cordially, Drieux 23:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I explained the title. The Pope being back in New Rome is in the third section on the Canticle novel. BiscuitTV (talk) 20:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Inaccurate summary

The summary of the plot is inaccurate in many ways - for example, it is not Pope Amen, but Pope Amen II, who leads (not just sends) an army of Nomads and clergymen to retake New Rome by force, and AEdra is not a Nomad at all, but a resident of New Jerusalem. TurinHurinson (talk) 19:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I fixed this BiscuitTV (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Other language(s)

Sorry not to master wikidata enough to include fr:L'Héritage_de_saint_Leibowitz. Jacques Ovion aka 82.224.88.52 (talk) 17:02, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Stub. Not enough info. { Ben S. Nelson } 00:06, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 00:06, 8 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 05:15, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Offensive, Vulgar Material

Could someone remove vulgar plot references.

Wikipedia:Offensive material BiscuitTV (talk) 10:04, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

The details in question seem quite important to the plot, and are a tame, non-gratuitous description of what happens in the relevant scenes. AntiDionysius (talk) 13:28, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Offensive material

Plot summary is bloated.

These few lines are offensive and unneccessary to summerise the story's plot. Grow up. Resd the guidelines. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction BiscuitTV (talk) 13:56, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Please refrain from making personal jabs.

The plot summary is indeed overly long; cutting it down in general would be no bad thing. Just cutting those sections, without replacement, seems like a bad way to go about it.

I'm sorry you find those lines offensive. But notably, the offensive material guideline specifies

"Material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers"

where "Wikipedia readers" is

"defined by the cultural beliefs of the majority of the website readers (not active editors) that are literate in an article's language"

In other words, you individually finding it offensive does not automatically mean it qualifies as offensive material. This material is, as I said, quite a plain description of some sexual acts which have quite significant plot effects. It's going to have to be noted somehow; is there a particular way it could be obliquely referenced that you think would be better? AntiDionysius (talk) 14:08, 8 October 2023 (UTC)