Talk:Regency

I've named the page Regency, and redirected Regency AU because I thought it might cover actual Regency-set fandoms as well as AUs, but I'm not deeply invested if someone feels that it should be the other way around, or that it should be Regency (trope) or something. --MegR 11:44, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I think Regency AU is a better fit. The page itself says that Regency AU is the most commonly used term and we shouldn't forget that the page isn't about the historical period, we have wikipedia for that, and it isn't about canon details of shows set in the Regency period either, because the wiki is about the way these things are used fannishly. However, the most common fannish use of the Regency period is the Regency AU. Naming it Regency (trope) is unnecessary disambiguation which should be avoided. I suggest moving the page to Regency AU.--Doro 10:24, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Regency AUs aren't at all common in the fandoms I read, so I can't really comment on their frequency, but there's a lot of fanfiction for Pride and Prejudice set in the Regency period, and there's a fair amount for other Regency era fandoms, eg other Austen, Georgette Heyer, Hornblower, Temeraire. I'd say leave it here. Espresso Addict 11:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I know these fandoms are set in that period, but the page is not about the period and can't be about that period because otherwise it would be off topic. Just like we have a page about Modern AUs and not about Modern although several shows and fandoms are set in modern times. --Doro 11:59, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Sure. What I'm trying to get at is that there's a lot of fannish activity for Regency canon as opposed to Regency AU. It might be interesting to compare fan activity in, say, Hornblower vs P&P. It would certainly be interesting to compile some Regency-set stories which are well known outside their own little fandoms, "Regency Fuck" for example. No-one's going to bother doing that if the page is named Regency AU, which is a different thing entirely (and completely uninteresting to Regency fans, who tend to be hooked on historical accuracy). Perhaps two separate pages is the answer? Espresso Addict 13:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Two separate pages seems like a good idea. Comparing different fandoms set at the same time sounds interesting. By its nature it would be more of a general fan activity page (Maybe something like the Age of Sail page? Regency Fandoms?) instead of a trope page so it would need a different template anyway and combining it on one page would be tricky. --Doro 13:40, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, something like the Age of Sail article but covering the more limited time period and more focused on romance than action, though the two do tend to overlap a bit. Regency Fandoms would be a reasonable title. The current page could be split, with each page referencing the other and Regency retained as a disambiguation. Espresso Addict 20:03, 8 October 2011 (UTC)