Old content moved to Talk:RPF/Archive1; new content should be put here.
Should we mention this sort of inbetween thing, where fans pick one or two actors that appeared together and then fixate on several of the characters and put on the fictional level random pairings and fandoms together because of actors? Like Kiefer/Lou?--RatCreature 08:35, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- I remember that in the real people fic discussions in 2001 people often mentioned in defense of RPF examples like Nick Lea fic where the only reason that fanfic about random minor characters existed was that they were played by a certain actor, so the RPF opposition couldn't claim it was all that different from actorfic. --Doro 09:10, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- I remember a similar point being made wrt the 6 degree fandoms like One West Waikiki fic existing because of TS and crossovers between these sources, also that these triggered an RPF squick for some because of the attention this brought to the actor's presence.
- Unrelated, another thing I noticed in this article is that the section called "The Happy Ending" which does not exactly encourage PPOVs to be added. Obviously the pro-RPF side in media fandom has decisively carried the day in this conflict, but not everyone is happy with the outcome. I mean, even though I don't have moral objections to RPF, I still would have been happier had RPF not become so visible everywhere and intermingled with the FPF fandom and its infratructures (all the mixed comms, fests and newsletters for example).--RatCreature 10:01, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not happy with the section title either. Same situation as with the K/S page. --Doro 10:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- Do you have any ideas what could be used as a more neutral header? Maybe "RPF becomes widely accepted"? Or maybe "RPF taboo falls"? to describe the current situation.--RatCreature 11:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- I went with "The Tipping Point" because it's still a taboo for some. What do you think? --Doro 11:56, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- That works for me.--RatCreature 12:05, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
SW Prequel RPS
While during in the first prequel movie fandom RPS was maybe small (I a clueless, at that time you could avoid encountering it in any case), it was my impression that soon with the second and particular the third movie it became much larger. At least in 2005 I was annoyed at the time that the comms weren't separate and I had trouble finding the SW FPS at first, what with me not even remembering the Anakin actor's name so it never occured to me to look at the Ewan/Hayden comm to find Obi-Wan/Anakin slash which I wanted, but at that point the SW slash used the RPS infrastructure, what with Obi-Wan/Anakin having never quite taken off as much as Obi-Wan/Qui-Gon in the first movie. --RatCreature 22:43, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
In the intro part it says "Specifically homosexual stories". Is this the right phrasing? It sounds weird to me but I don't know why and I don't want to change it just because. --Doro 02:46, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not into the fandom, but I agree that "homosexual stories" sounds strange, mostly I think because "homosexual" in place of "gay" doesn't get used all that often to describe things rather than just label only people or relationships. And with "gay" you'd get the whole "but is slash gay?" quagmire, so I'd suggest either outsourcing the problem by just pointing at the slash article and leave it at that, i.e. put in a sentence like "The term slash is used for RPF as well, e.g. terms like Actor Slash, Real People Slash (RPS) or Real People Femslash (RPFS)." or turn "homosexual stories" into "stories with same sex pairings are often referred to..."--RatCreature 06:39, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
move Non-Fandom RPF to right after summary?
The non-fandom section is awkward everywhere, moving it to the top after the summary would give context to the fandom issues later on. --msilverstar 17:09, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm good with that. --facetofcathy 17:15, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- I like what you've done here, that flows much better.--facetofcathy 13:15, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oh yay! Glad it works --msilverstar 15:34, 28 March 2010 (UTC)