From Fanlore
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Seeing how this page is the first wikilink from the main page, I think it needs to be way, way improved on. Any ideas? Mrs. Potato Head 01:14, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

That's a good idea, I'd like to see this article filled out too. I've started a list of types of fanworks; I'm sure I missed a lot so please be adding to it, and maybe add in a mini-definition next to each one? That's all I got for now, I'll check back in later. -- Kylara 02:20, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Just found on Language Log, in a discussion of something completely else, the Chinese word hè: "join in singing; write a poem in the style / theme of someone else; compose a poem in reply." Seems like a concise non-western expression of transformative work, wonder if I should add this to the page. --msilverstar 19:50, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

msilverstar, I hope you're still around. I think this is rather brilliant, and I've just created a new section at the bottom of this page into which it seems to fit. I've taken the liberty of adding it, but of course please feel free to edit as you wish! | Julie (talk) 02:14, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Aw gee, thanks! I'm not sure the text in "They Said it Best" was meant to be visible though. --msilverstar (talk) 18:13, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
No worries! :-) I put the text there to help inspire people to think of other examples. Once we have more content, and the content speaks for itself, it could happily be deleted. Hope that's OK, and I'm happy to be overruled if not. | Julie (talk) 23:53, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure this sentence describes all fanworks: In fanworks, some element of a canon work -- the source text or event -- is taken and incorporated into a new creative piece. It's true of fic, fanart, and vids, but what about meta, websites, and fannish stuff that contains references to fandom itself and not to a particular canon?--aethel (talk) 17:09, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

When a work is about fandom rather than a particular canon, then I'd consider fandom itself to be the canon. The phrase "fandom is my fandom" comes to mind. I recall a Fandom/LJ fanfic, with Fandom and LJ as anthropomorphized characters, as an example of a fanwork where the fandom itself is the canon. I don't think the definition excludes those types of fanworks. -- Kylara (talk) 18:38, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
But once you get past fanfic, what about other stuff fans make, like convention t-shirts or buttons with fannish phrases or wikis like Fanlore? Talking about fandom as a canon is a very fanfic-centric way of describing it.--aethel (talk) 19:31, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Buttons, shirts, meta, websites, etc. about fandom are all still included though. It's still taking some element from fandom-as-a-source-text (culture, quotes, ideas, history, etc.) and doing something creative with it. If the phrasing seems limiting though, perhaps we should put a qualifier into the sentence, i.e. "In most fanworks" instead of "In fanworks"? -- Kylara (talk) 20:23, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

proposed edit removal

I propose removing the recent addition by JoyBot05 of Muktokathan, A Bangladeshi Literary Magazine. Not only does it not fit the section of the page, but there is no evidence that it is fannish. --MPH (talk) 12:54, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree -- Kingstoken (talk) 14:22, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
While I agree that the addition does not fit the section of the page, we can be a little bit more gentle with newcomers. They may not understand why something doesn't fit the section on a page, and immediate reversion may be a turnoff. Let's try to rework things.
JoyBot05, what is Muktokathan? Do they cover fanworks at all, had interviews with fans, etc? There may be a better place or article on Fanlore where a reference to that magazine may fit. Pinky G Rocket (talk) 17:02, 5 August 2022 (UTC)