Talk:Fannish Bookbinding

From Fanlore
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Definitions

Should the "bookmaking" section include (semi-)professionally bound books like The Fundamental Fanfic for All Fandoms thing or is that too broad a category?Baycitybomber 19:27, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

I would say yes - if we are including "print on demand services" or "print services" as a method of fannish bookbinding (which that project appears to be), as it is in the current definition of included methods. Based on a quick review, I think that a note can be added to the introduction paragraph that "Fannish Bookbinding" as an activity and fancraft has some overlap with the creation of custom fanzines. Desmothene (talk) 12:10, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Only positives view?

I know some fans love fanbinding, but the page only shows the beautiful side of the activity by forgetting who does it the wrong way. In Brazil there are cases of counterfeit books, which are fanfics printed without authorization showing how the activity also has its dangers. Outside Brazilian fandom this has also happened, if someone could also add information about it would be interesting for a better construction of the article -- Ellakbhesse (talk) 16:34, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

The previous iteration of the page only contained a brief definition of fannish bookbinding, an section of "Criticisms and Controversies" with no citations, and the examples list. The "positives view" was the most glaringly lacking thing. Therefore when starting I prioritized a re-organization into a more general "reception" section with a break out of both positives and negatives, with a focus on the positives with citations since there were none listed at all. I haven't touched the criticism section yet. I do have actual sources for fandom discussion of criticism (and the above example of "The Fundamental Fanfic for All Fandoms" exhibits some others), as well as common fanbinding practices to proactively minimize the possibility of harm. I have no sources relating to any type of counterfeit book operations in Brazil; someone else will have to provide those. Desmothene (talk) 12:10, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
I'm Brazilian, I know many Brazilian fanwriters, of these almost none want their fic printed by a stranger and publicized as a fan work when it looks more like an attempt to take over of the work of others. On TikTok there was a huge discussion about piracy of books and fanfics on Shoppe and other sales sites. People who called themselves bookbinders were stealing other people's work from fanfics to even professional books and reselling as something original on the internet. I think it's beautiful who works with bookbinding, but I've always been afraid of this activity, due to the criminal actions of some people -- Ellakbhesse (talk) 08:45, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
And abuse like that should be accurately reflected in the criticism section of the page, of course. What I am saying is that I do not have citations or sources I can link for those instances in the article. If you are aware of them or have links to authors discussing such topics and can link them into the discussion, that would be great. Desmothene (talk) 10:31, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Desmothene i would like you not to vandalize the page by removing my comment just because it criticizes the ultra positive views you have added to the page obliterated the negative points or criticisms against this fan activity, if you disagree with what i say you don't need to delete what i wrote. Will I have to ask an administrator to intervene? because it amazes me that you did this removal of my comment along with yours, this sort of thing is outrageous. You cannot tamper with other people's comments this way. I was very unhappy with this situation. reverted your edit, because what you did wasn't right -- Ellakbhesse (talk) 04:49, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

I have not intended to remove or edit any of your comments, Ellakbhesse. I apologize if I did anything to make it appear this way - on review of the past history of the talk page it appears that I accidentally deleted or reverted to a previous version without those two comments?? It certainly was not intentional. Thank you for reverting the page to the correct version, but I would appreciate you not being so accusatory. I made a mistake (that am still not quite certain how it happened? If someone else could explain, that would be great). I am not quite familiar with the talk page. The only edits I have intentionally made to another's comment are: a) putting the top talk section under a category of "Definition," and b) because I thought you had made the top comment (about what things should be included under "bookmaking") I added your user tag there. Later I was looking at old revisions and saw that one under user "Aethel" and realized I was incorrect. So I went to edit the tag to their name (I suspect this might have been when I accidentally reverted the page? or deleted comments? Unclear). I have now clicked through every version of this talk page and I am once again WRONG - the first comment on the talk page belongs to Baycitybomber (fixed now)! I would like to point out that in the comment I apparently deleted, I was not angry or frustrated - I acknowledged that the things you were bringing up should be documented on the page, and I asked you to provide links to do so because I could not. Desmothene (talk) 09:24, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
Sometimes accidental removals of page content can occur when there's an edit clash (two people editing the page at the same time) or if you're editing the page in multiple tabs and save the wrong version - I've accidentally removed my own additions this way 😂 However, Desmothene it's best to avoid altering another user's Talk page comments in any way, even if you see an issue like a misattribution that you think should be corrected. This is a wiki etiquette thing, but you can always tag the person in question further down to draw their attention to a lack of signature or a wrong name being appended to a comment!
But I'm sure you didn't intend to remove any comments and like I said, there are ways that this can happen - luckily, content can always be restored from the edit history, so no harm done.
Ellakbhesse, we would love you to help document your experiences and memories of this practice in Brazilian fandom, as it would be a very valuable perspective to represent indeed. There is definitely no one way to represent the drawbacks of a certain fannish practice and we want to make sure Fanlore has as many perspectives as possible. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 08:07, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
enchantedsleeper, thank you so much for explaining! I will make sure to be careful with how many tabs I have open for editing (many tabs... a sin of mine), and to be careful and not do anything with the Talk page comments. Desmothene (talk) 10:35, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Desmothene there was no reversal, you deleted my comment and yours together. When a rollback is made, the page marks it as a rollback, not an edit with characters removed. I felt extremely uncomfortable. I confronted the way in which the page was being edited, I talked about the mess involving the activity in Brazil (which unfortunately I cannot link to, as I am no longer in contact with this demand in Brazilian fandom). What upset and frustrated me is that editing someone else's comment to correct something simple like adding a section, authorship or a link is not invalid/invasive, but removing is. You removed my comment, yours and even made an edit on another comment of yours. You cannot delete what someone says on a talk page is considered vandalism in my view. And if I'm not mistaken in the Fanlore rules too. I'm going to refrain from this situation. This type of attitude discourages an editor from giving his opinion, because if we address a situation we receive a silence, it is preferable to say nothing. -- Ellakbhesse (talk) 09:34, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers Hey, let's not be rude to new users, especially new users who make honest mistakes. Vandalism implies deliberate bad faith. This is not bad faith, it is an honest mistake, therefore it is not vandalism. No one new and that doesn't know well how a wiki works should be treated unkindly. Alpha (talk) 21:01, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

General Page Construction

Desmothene (talk) 12:10, 25 July 2022 (UTC): Some thoughts on the general organization of the page and places for expansion:

  • Intro/definition: Add to information, including overlapping and related fancrafts (zines).
  • Motivations for Fannish Bookbinding
  • Types and Methods of Fannish Bookbinding
  • Locations of Social Media Activity, organizations, and groups
  • Reception:
    • Positive Response
    • Criticism&Controversy - including a discussion of the negative view of print on demand services, author personal use of POD services, fan unauthorized use of POD services, for-profit commissions, etc
  • Related Fandom Studies (a summary of the academic studies done on fannish bookbinding, if not already cited in other sections)
  • Examples (divided by category)
    • "Object of Canon" (perhaps needs a better title) - bindings of books which exist or are inspired by canon (not fanfic)
    • Rebinding/Recovering - taking an owned canon text and giving it a transformation
    • Fanfic Binding (end)Desmothene (talk) 12:10, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Bookbinding for Profit and TikTok

It looks like the monetisation of bookbinding is either becoming more prevalent or more attention has been drawn to it because of some accounts on TikTok where TikTok creators are making videos about buying and selling bound books (including reportedly some for a very high price, I don't know if people have bought these or they're just listed for this price). Manacled and other Dramione books seem to be the works in discussions a lot, but there are others, so here is a link archive for anyone in the future who wants to document/explore this:

Adding more links as Emerald_Slytherin continues to have issues, including people creating Etsy accounts in her name and her thoughts about considering removing Secrets and Masks from AO3:

Cookies and chaos (talk) 10:21, 23 February 2024 (UTC) Cookies and chaos (talk) 16:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Some another link as Emerald_Slything continues to face problems with people stealing and monetising her work, including now setting up an Etsy account under her name:

Cookies and chaos (talk) 10:21, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://fanlore.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fannish_Bookbinding&oldid=2586223"