Talk:Reality Shifting

Focusing on fandom involvement, general concern, a rename

Currently, there is some information on this page about controversies in the reality shifting community that isn't related to fandom; I propose we remove that information. It's not related to Fanlore's purpose of focusing on fandom culture- that sort of information is more general Internet culture.

On a second note, while this is a more general concern and not an immediate issue, I think we should tread carefully while expanding this page. Pages on pseudoscientific topics may attract wank between believers/practicers and skeptics/nonbelievers.

On a much different note, the title of this page isn't properly capitalized. Pinky G Rocket (talk) 21:19, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

I have added more information about the fandom that the controversy is related to, I tried digging for the others but it's turned up quite imposible since most of the people caught have since deleted their channels. I do have to say that the shifttok comunity is quite big, at least on tik tok, so I think it fits quite well in fanlore since it is mainly centered in shifting to fictional worlds.

I think we have tried to keep things as neutral as posible for now, hopefully it will remain so.

I do not know how to fix the title.

User: SandySins (talk) 0:27,19 April 2022 (GMT+1)

I hope you don't mind that I indented your reply, SandySins - it just makes the discussion easier to read. (There are some tips on how to do this in this section of the Talk pages Help page). Oh, and not to worry about the page title - a special level of editing rights is needed to rename pages, but it's been renamed now!

As a general point about this page, I'm wondering whether it's a good idea to have a "Controversies" section since it lends itself to listing out different incidents, and whether a different framing would be helpful, like maybe subdividing the page into different fandoms such as Harry Potter.

However, since my knowledge of shifting and the shifting community is limited, I don't know how the practice actually translates into something that can be talked about on Fanlore outside of infamous incidents. Do people make videos about their shifts? Are there any practices distinct to shifting in a fannish context, like the sharing of fandom-specific scripts for example? --enchantedsleeper (talk) 22:05, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't mind at all, I learn new things about formattimg on this site every day!

Also yes, there are many focused videos and pictures of people listing their scripts or what they want to happen for Hogwarts for example, I will try and find some examples soon. There are also many scripts templates, as well as shared experiences within the fandom, the most prominent being Harry Potter although I have also read and seen some with the Lady Bug fandom.

Perhaps instead of Controversies I could change it to Notable events, or perhaps someone could come up with something better.

SandySins (talk) 1:31,20 April 2022 (GMT+1)

Thank you for adding those! --enchantedsleeper (talk) 11:08, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Related to the second paragraph of my original paragraph; OfMonstersAndWerewolves, I noticed you put labels stating that the concept of reality shifting is pseudoscientific. I don't think those should be there. Criticism of reality shifting is already noted in the article's opening, and outright calling it pseudoscientific goes against plural point of view, in my opinion. Pinky G Rocket (talk) 00:34, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Hey Pinky G Rocket. I don't think explicitly stating something is pseudoscience goes against PPOV. If anything, part of the reason why I included it was because I was worried the article was presented too far for reality shifting being legitimate than against. I do think that documenting things from multiple points of view is important, but I also think we have a responsibility to not peddle pseudoscience whilst documenting fandom. Let's say there was an influx in a fandom related Flat Earth movement. Though Flat Earth is a much more obvious form of pseudoscience, and hence there's less of a need perhaps for explicit condemnation, you also wouldn't try and legitimise it under the guise of PPOV, which I worry, in the way some of it is worded, is the narrative, subtle as it may be, on the reality shifting page.

It's fine with certain opinions, but once you start veering into the realm of pseudoscience, you can't, and shouldn't, give equal weight to both sides. Documenting them is fine, giving equal legitimacy to a pseudoscience vs actual science isn't. If it turns out there is extensive scientific backing after extensive and meticulous scientific research is conducted, then it no longer is a pseudoscience and the legitimacy would then flip, and the narrative of the article would then skew the other way.

Most pages on Fanlore are gonna be skewed cause it's edited by human beings, which is what PPOV is there to try and minimise. But that doesn't mean perpetuating untrue narratives. The issue with having it in the third paragraph in the opening, is that if you're skimming the article, it positions it as something that people simply have disagreeing opinions on, and can also easily be missed. By presenting it right at the top of the article, you present a level of context behind both the page and the concept itself to take it with a pinch of salt. But there's also enough wiggle room that you can still decide for yourself if that concept has any kind of relevancy at all, or why someone might be interested in pursuing it, or whether, and to what extent, it might be harmful. -- OfMonstersAndWerewolves (talk) 12:08, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I disagree - we do not mark the fictionkin or Snapewives pages as "pseudoscience." I think we can leave it to the readers to figure out if "change your reality to one where Draco Malfoy is your actual literal boyfriend" is real or not. This is not a matter of PPOV but how we approach controversies in fandom, including controversies involving hard facts. It's not giving equal weight to both sides, and it's not even saying "hey maybe these people have a point." It's a matter of avoiding labels that not only claim what is real and what isn't, but that side with specific communities on how to label and discuss those topics. "Pseudoscience" is not a neutral, objective term. It involves judgment calls that Fanlore editors are not, as a whole, qualified to make. This is especially true when the topics veer into spirituality and personal identity.

We can make it clear that "reality shifting" is a variant of "this dream I had really happened" (with a side measure of "and you are all supposed to agree with me that it really happened") without bringing mainstream scientific controversy approaches to fandom activities. - Elf (talk) 19:41, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Elf on this one. The page already signposted the fact that skeptics have pointed out the practice's resemblance to maladaptive daydreaming, etc., including links to sources. That already skirts the line a bit in terms of fannish relevance, but you could characterise it as a response from fans outside of the shifting community. However, we don't add pseudoscience labels to any of our other pages because this is not a scientific wiki, and we are not going around evaluating each page for its scientific merits. It's not about giving any one side or other legitimacy - we're not saying "every perspective on this page is correct and true", otherwise we would have serious problems with the pages that document beliefs like Louis Tomlinson and Harry Styles having a secret baby. However, we can look to the handling of topics like those for ways to document those perspectives without lending them undue weight.

We also don't evaluate external links for their merits or scientific validity, so again, putting a warning next to those is a bad precedent to set for Fanlore in general.

However, I also don't think that collecting lists of shifting methods on the page is relevant to Fanlore's purview as a fannish wiki; there's no explicit fannish purpose for these, and we need to be wary of turning this page into some kind of collection of shifting resources. We're here to document what fans do, so it's relevant to say "fans often share 'scripts' for their shifting experiences geared towards a specific fandom" and "here are some examples of those", but saying "this is how you shift" is not what Fanlore is here for. So I would remove the "Shifting Methods" section, and I would also remove the "The Odd1sout video" because there's no link to fandom that I can determine. The reason I suggested reframing the Controversies section is because I don't want us to get bogged down in listing individual shifting controversies that aren't relevant to fandom or fannish practices.

I'm not sure that most of the "'Fake' shifters" section is relevant either, even if it involves a HP shifter, because the overall framing is of something that is focused on the impact to the overall shifting community. A general wiki about shifting would a good place to document these incidents, but Fanlore's subject matter is fandom. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 11:03, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

This is a documentation of fandom and although I don't expect anyone to comb trough the 552 methods (I haven't read all of them either) I can asure you at least 5 or more in each compilation are created arround a fandom and read similar to an "Imagine you are in this universe kind written fiction". I wish I could find something with only fandom methods but I was unable to. I put a warning behorehand for a reason as well. Of course if you would rather look for some fanish exemples inside those collections, and link them or post captures here that would be better.

The Odds1out is a very popular youtuber and animator (he doesnt have a page here yet), he has a big comunity of fans behind him who agreed with his opinion and thus attacked reality shifters, so I believe it belongs since it involves his fandom.

Finally I guess I could reframe the fake shifters to only HP since the Shifter HP comunity has been very vocal about the situation. Although I feel it would be a diservice to other smaller fandoms that also had big creators do the same, but have less traction on tiktok and I could only find passing mentions of. (As I said they deleted their pages so information is very hard to come by) What do others think about this?

SandySins (talk) 13:41,22 April 2022 (GMT+1)

Looks like I'm outnumbered atm then. Fair dos. -- OfMonstersAndWerewolves (talk) 16:26, 22 April 2022 (UTC)