The Left Hand of Darkness is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 23, 2016.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 8, 2016 Good article nominee Listed September 9, 2016 Featured article candidate Promoted July 9, 2016 Peer review Reviewed A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 19, 2016. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Ursula K. Le Guin's Hugo and Nebula award-winning 1969 novel The Left Hand of Darkness is set on a fictional planet whose people are neither male nor female for most of their sexual cycle? Current status: Featured article

This  level-5 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Novels: Fantasy / Sci-fi High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Fantasy task force (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by Science fiction task force (assessed as High-importance). Science Fiction High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. LGBTQ+ studies This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies Women writers High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Arts This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Arts 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.ArtsWikipedia:WikiProject ArtsTemplate:WikiProject ArtsWikiProject Arts

I invite editors who appear to be edit-warring over the inclusion of Category:Anarcha-feminism to discuss here please :-)

@Doomhope, @Vanamonde93, @GwydionM Funcrunch (talk) 17:36, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly edit-warring! I'm not opposed in principle to the category, but we have no content in the article supporting it. I've read a lot of analysis of Le Guin's writing. Anarchism is a prominent theme, but it's not really analyzed relative to this book as far as I am aware. If anyone who wishes to add this category is willing to produce a good source, I'm willing to try to work it into the article. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:48, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

True that it's not yet an edit war, I just feared that it was heading in that direction. I agree that there should be reliable sources to justify including the category.

(Aside: Le Guin, who I was fortunate to meet in person, is my favorite author, and I took my last name, Gethen, from this book.) Funcrunch (talk) 18:02, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'm not interested in edit wars either - I think Vanamonde93's assessment is fair and if I find a source I'll come back to chat about it :) Doomhope (talk) 19:51, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elsewhere, I wasted some time giving a source from someone who would not otherwise permit it to be said that Kier Starmer was the UK Prime Minister. But if it is going to become a habit to root out well-known facts without someone wasting time, I am not going to be one of the time-wasters. If you insist on removing definite truths, I have better things to do with my time.GwydionM (talk) 07:09, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further to the above, GwydionM is now repeatedly inserting very minor mentions of TV, including a character reading the book in a single scene in a single episode. This is basically trivia by Wikipedia's standards, and it is not sufficient for a mention here: to be clear, this article is about the book, as per the article's title. Whether it's worth mentioning in the article on the TV series is a separate issue (I doubt it, but it doesn't concern us here). A secondary topic is how the book has been adapted to TV, film, theatre, etc., and a plan for a future film is (pace WP:CRYSTAL) just about worth mentioning. A TV episode that on some whim of the director has a character holding a book for a moment is definitely below the threshold (a minor aside to a branch of a side issue to the main topic: no). All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:03, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a single Mashable source as sufficient to warrant the inclusion of that factoid. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:21, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As excited as I was to see one of my favorite books in a scene on one of my favorite (current) TV series, I have to agree that this was too minor to warrant inclusion in a Wikipedia article. Funcrunch (talk) 23:42, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]