Talk:Harlequin Challenge
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
I think this should be moved to just Harlequin; lots of Harlequin stories are written without a challenge. --MegR 18:41, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- But shouldn't under Harlequin be the fandom of that source? Like people collecting the romance novels or whatever?--RatCreature 19:00, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- For the general genre, maybe that would fit on a Romance page?--RatCreature 19:05, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Is collecting romance novels really a fanac? The page is only a few paragraphs long, I felt it could easily be broadened to cover Harlequin stories that aren't written for a specific challenge, but ok. Harlequin AU? Except I'm not sure they're always AU. But Romance seems a bit broad? --MegR 19:17, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- I have no clue what romance novel fans do, I just sort of assume they exist and do something. I know there are blogs with meta about romance novels and all sorts of writing communities of romance writers.--RatCreature 19:25, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- ETA: also as a comic fan, one of my major activities when I have enough money to spend on that fandom is collecting comics, that was the primary way I engaged with fandom for my first decade as a fan. I collected the comics and got them signed with drawings at conventions, bought zines that talked about the material of artists to find all their stuff, I'm fairly sure all that counts as fanac, because it is activity that only fans do.--RatCreature 19:29, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- I dunno. I tend to feel that identifying as part of Fandom is important to being part of fandom, which I don't think romance novel fans (collectively, as regards romance novels; obviously many fen also read romance novels) tend to do. Plus I think if anyone who saw romance novels as a fannish source text ever showed up I'd be included to file that under Romance Novels Fandom (well, something less awful, but along those lines); Harlequin's not the only publisher and it's just not the primary use to which fandom (or the part of fandom that's likely to actually use fanlore) puts the word.--MegR 20:04, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Consolidating some of the discussion above--What about making a romance page (I'm shocked that there isn't one.) that discuses romance as a genre in fanworks, possibly even put in something about the crossover between slash and m/m pro romance (or not if the wank there is too intimidating). That page could discuss the influence of both romance novels and films on all fanworks. It would link to a Harlequin AU page where the specific fic style of mirroring actual Harlequin/Mills&Boon novels is discussed. This page of challenge-specific information could be incorporated into that page as a section or left separate and linked to. (There are sections on the Icon page about Icon challenges as an example of combining. I just made a glossary page for LIMS as an example of separation.) The Story Tropes page links here when it really should go to a Harlequin AU page. Also even if this page is left as is, I don't think it's a stub anymore.--facetofcathy 19:50, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- As above, my only quibble with Harlequin AU is that I'm not sure Harlequin stories are always AU, so just Harlequin seemed easier, but I can't actually think of any examples and I don't suppose it really matters. I'm still for combining, or subpaging Harlequin Challenge to a Harlequin AU page; they are essentially the same thing afaic. --MegR 20:11, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- No reason not to have a trope page just titled Harlequin, since it can be in its "purest" form a fusion rather than an AU, and I can absolutely see something like a Sherlock Holmes story following the plot of a period romance novel to the T and have it be a canon story, so I think you are on to something in not using the AU limiter. Of course Harlequin fic is not always all that pure--there was part of another fest (Under Misletoe I think, I should look that up), where the prompts were the jacket blurbs from books, not the actual plots--yet another example of the trope used outside a challenge. Oh, and fanart done to look like a jacket cover--someone has to have done this--wouldn't be AU either necessarily. --facetofcathy 20:44, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Again, this is a page about a specific kind of challenge. We are allowed to have pages about specific kind of challenges. We don't need "One Page To Rule Them All". I think the page is still a stub but it can also stand on its own, so I wouldn't be against removing the stub template, but there is a lot more to tell about Harlequin challenges (see The Schmarlequin Contests). --Doro 20:28, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- [Weird edit conflict, hope this makes sense?] Doro: That Schmarlequin Contests page is already a top level page that this page links to, so I'm not sure what you mean? Having separate pages for individual communities/challenges/fanworks etc seems like a different thing to me than having a separate page for every specific *kind* of challenge - I mean, I wouldn't be keen on having Virgin Challenge separate from Virginfic etc, even though they exist, because it seems repetitive. I guess I'm not getting why you're so adamant about wanting a separate page for Harlequin as a type of challenge, rather than a type of fanwork which is (most?) often created in response to a challenge. I think it's pointless to have both, but whatever.
- Facetofcathy: we've come right back to the beginning now, I think, I originally suggested just having Harlequin. Ratcreature suggested that some people might see the actual Harlequin novels as a source text but, as above, I'm not convinced that Harlequin would be a good name for that page even if anyone did.--MegR 20:54, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm running into this problem of naming over and over on the trope page. Fandom parlance is often to attach the fic ender to the trope which makes a different problem that I tried and failed to solve with AU. I think we definitely need a page to discuss Harlequin as a trope in fanworks as a separate thing from Romance as a genre in fanworks. (I have no position on whether or not to put this challenge information that is on this page on that same page or leave it separate. Either works. But not having a page for the trope itself does not work for me.) What about Harlequin (Trope)? It's clunky, but it gets the point across and avoids the issue of naming confusion and would allow Harlequin to be a disambig page if that proved necessary.--facetofcathy 21:12, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- My problem with "romance novel fandom" vs Harlequin for the source page and its fandom, is that I've always thought that "Harlequin" was a generic brand now referring to a type, just like "Xerox" for copiers, which I assumed was the whole reason we have "Harlequin Challenges" rather than "romance novel challenges" in the first place, and that the same generic brand naming would apply to the fandom as well. Though if everybody thinks that no Harlequin novel fan was likely to ever show up in this wiki anyway (whether because it doesn't exist, though I have trouble believing that, or because they are unlikely to ever want to bother with a media fandom dominated wiki), and we don't need a page for that as a source and the fan community, then I'm not against having it for the trope on principle or anything. And I guess anything can be moved.--RatCreature 21:59, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Well MillsandBoonsfic would just sound silly. Seriously, in so far as romance novels *is* a fandom, I think it's a lot broader than one publisher. Romance community/romance fandom is what google has thrown up so far, though I guess if they showed up they might still want a page on Harlequin-the-publisher. Eh. I'm still for plain Harlequin rather than +(Trope), but in the interests of full disclosure, google also tells me there's a minor film, a Joker fan film and four obscure comic book characters called Harlequin. I will go with the majority, and put my vote in for a redirect over a disambig. --MegR 22:33, 27 March 2010 (UTC)