Talk:Sherlock Holmes

Hi, I've removed the reference to Holmes fandom being declared ineligible for Yuletide in 2007, because it wasn't; the Archive shows half a dozen Holmes stories for the 2007 Yuletide challenge.--Mary Crawford 12:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Sorry I screwed that up. --Sophinisba 14:48, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

No worries! I'm just relieved to find it's not eliminated yet. :-)--Mary Crawford 15:25, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

This seems to have changed this year; straight Holmes, as I understand, got too big, but certain subcanons are still OK. (Have updated accordingly.)--djonn 00:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Reorganizing page, naming conventions

Votes for or against moving the zinelist to its own page? The page is getting long, and that's the longest section. --the old briar pipe 01:34, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

A thought - rather than move the zine-list alone, maybe move the entire group of subheadings in the Fandom section to a "Sherlock Holmes: fanworks" subpage. That strikes me as a cleaner division than moving the zine-list by itself. (If the zine-list eventually gets long enough, it could then be split off from the subpage, so that there'd be "Sherlock Holmes: Zines" and "Sherlock Holmes: Other Fanworks".) --djonn 02:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

That was my first thought, so I definitely agree. I just didn't know how much people wanted to move. Would that also include the pro fanworks section, with its connected sub-fandoms section, or should that stay where it is? --the old briar pipe 02:51, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

My instinct would be to leave the pro-fanworks section on the main page, since this wiki is specifically not in the business of making any sort of complete list thereof. [Linking to, yes; compiling, no way. :-) ] I think it can profitably be edited (and I may take a stab at that in a moment here), but that it need not be moved. --djonn 03:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Excellent, I'm all for editing. When you're done, I might add a couple of other adaptations that have spawned their own mini-fandoms or fandom segments. (Among other things, Granada and the new movie both need to be mentioned somewhere.) --the old briar pipe 03:09, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I would recommend moving the zine list to List of Sherlock Holmes Zines, since it follows standard practice on the wiki. I'd also love to read a page that discusses Sherlock Holmes Fanfiction or Sherlock Holmes Fanworks. However, I've been wondering about the vid section in particular--right now, I think all the examples are from the 1980s Granada series, so they might be more relevant to a Sherlock Holmes (1984) page or to a vid-specific page discussing all the vids from different film adaptations and how they relate to book fandom (if they do). Alas, I don't have enough knowledge to create these pages. But I did start a Sherlock Holmes (2009) page so we can talk about fanworks and meta specific to the new movie!--æthel 03:56, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Interesting! I definitely agree the new movie has spawned its own mini-fandom (or mega-fandom, at this point), so it really does deserve its own page. As does Granada.

Regarding the Granada series, should it be called Sherlock Holmes (1984) or by the more traditional name of Sherlock Holmes (Granada)? The series was produced over several years with some gaps, not to mention that an American movie of that title came out that year and I think one of the Russian movies as well, along with the Japanese anime Sherlock Hound. Oh, and "The Murder of Sherlock Holmes". (I'd forgotten about that one - thanks, IMDB!) There were also a few other movies / tv productions in 2009, some of them with the exact title of the Downey movie, so that page title might need a change, too? To sum it up, years are sadly unhelpful when it comes to SH fandom. It's too huge, and with too many pro adaptations being constantly produced. Tradition has us distinguish them by either the production house or the actor playing Holmes. ^_^ --the old briar pipe 04:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

You're right. Either Sherlock Holmes (Granada) or Sherlock Holmes (Granada Television) would be best. So the Guy Ritchie film should be Sherlock Holmes (Warner Brothers)?--æthel 05:23, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Huh, you know, I don't think I've seen anyone reference the WB film yet, so I'm not sure what they call it. Is it the only SH film by WB in existence? If so, then that's likely accurate. --the old briar pipe 19:22, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Rewrote and rearranged most of what's now the "Published Pastiches" section, added and subtracted from the sample list of pro works, added a link/reference to a near-definitive bibliography, moved some material up into "Fandom" (creating "History" and "Vocabulary" subsections) {ETA: and added a mention of the ST:TNG Moriarty episodes). My initial goal had been mostly to tinker with the list of pro works, to include a wider range and emphasize works with fanfic-like elements; the rearranging occurred in order to keep the focus of the "Pastiche" section squarely on point. Anyhow: I think the "sampling of pro works" list is now about as long as it needs to be, but there may well be a worthwhile conversation about exactly what should be on it. --djonn 04:53, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

links

This group looks interesting: Adventuresses of Sherlock Holmes. And queering_holmes, a new dreamwidth community. Not sure where to put these.--æthel 18:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

You linked directly to a specific conversation on queering_holmes, which I think is quite relevant to 2 ideas: differing fandom treatments springing from different sub-canons, and a change (possibly) in fannish tropes surrounding the sexual choices of the characters. I would almost say we need a page either on SH meta in general (could be huge if not carefully defined), on the first topic, or on slash fandom within SH fandom. It could go on any one of the three. --the old briar pipe 19:22, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Another interesting site that may fit: http://gaysherlockholmes.blogspot.com/search/label/zine?max-results=20 --Mrs. Potato Head 20:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I added in a lot of information on the early history of the BSI and related organizations (perhaps too much?) and also about its demographic profile and formal exclusion of women. That formed the back history for the foundation of the Adventuresses of Sherlock Holmes, so I added in a link to that group in that section. Cordelia V 03:35, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

You know, the history section is long enough now that it could get its own page. History of Sherlock Holmes Fandm?--æthel 03:46, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Fine with me, if you want to create that page; I'm not always clear on what our ideal page length is, to be honest. I'm sure I'll add even more to a "history of" page over time. One thing that has held me back from adding to pages for fandoms where I know a lot about their histories is that I'm afraid I'll add too much, and that it will seem too analytical. Perhaps I shouldn't let that stop me. Cordelia V 18:04, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Rather than a "history of Holmes fandom" page, I've spun off a Baker Street Irregulars page -- it seemed like a tidier solution, and goodness knows the organization deserves it. Eventually, I think both the Sherlock Holmes Society and the Baker Street Journal probably should have their own pages as well (though I don't have the detailed knowledge to hand to build either of those at present). --djonn 19:12, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Vids

I don't think the vid section belongs on this page as there are no vids for the books and the adaptations have their own pages. --Doro 16:00, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I am not even remotely involved in vid-fandom, but it seems to me that since this is an overview-page for Holmes fandom in general -- encompassing both the books and various media-incarnations -- it's reasonable to at least mention the existence of vids and list a couple of samples, just as we mention a handful of major commercial pastiches but don't try to cover them all. --djonn 16:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Split this into two articles?

I feel that this page is ambitiously trying to both be the page for Doyle's original version as well as be a general overview/hub for all of the versions of Sherlock Holmes fandom. I'd like to suggest that these two ambitions be separated into two pages: a general/hub page for all Sherlock Holmes fandom, and a separate page for Doyle's original stories. This would allow the Doyle page to be more specific to the original without being too distracted by other versions, and to give fandom a more general introductory page for Sherlock Holmes in all his incarnations. I suggest that Sherlock Holmes be the hub page, and perhaps Sherlock Holmes (Doyle) be the page to focus on the original. I realize this is a sticky thing, as the original stories have obvious influence on all incarnations and sub-fandoms that came after, but I think it'll make for neater pages and it'll give both ambitions space to thrive; right now, linked as they are, I feel it's mutually limiting. I'm not sure I'm up to separating them myself at the moment, (sticky as it is,) but I'd like to start the discussion to see where we might go from here. -- Kylara 00:27, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I think you're right that the current arrangement is limiting growth. We could move the current "canon" and most of the "fandom" sections to a Doyle page, though some of the link-heavy sections like fanfic and online resources might fit on both pages (maybe they could be retooled so we don't have too many duplicate links). Definitely history, maybe vocabulary, and fanzines would go on the Doyle page. The problem for me is where would we put a discussion on contemporary Holmes fandom, since it seems to embrace (or at least form strong opinions about) the adaptations? Would the Doyle page be more focused on history?--æþel 01:09, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree that "canon" and most of the "fandom" sections could be moved to a Doyle page. The history section as it is seems Doyle-focused, so I agree it should also move. A contemporary/general history section could be on the hub page to pull everything together, and maybe we'll eventually need something like a History of Sherlock Holmes Fandom page to ambitiously try to accomodate the 100+ years of Sherlock Holmes in one comprehensive section, if anyone wants to tackle it.

For fanwork links, perhaps the hub page should only hold onto links that apply to multiple versions of Holmes. (And maybe for fanworks that are orphaned, i.e. we don't have a sub-fandom page for them yet.) The links for the Jeremy Brett vids, for instance, seem to me that they should only be on the Granada page. I don't mind links being on two pages as long as they're relevant to both pages though. Fanzines can be on both pages, because it's a link to a compilation list (for many version of Holmes) and relevant to both. If the vocabulary section might expand to include newer terms (from newer sub-fandoms) then I'd like at least part of it to remain on the hub page as well, though again it could be on both. -- Kylara 06:34, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Specific Edit

I rolled back the edit by User:Swamp Adder because it was removing content without discussion (not that this is against policy, it is just a standard practice to talk about it before moving/removing stuff) and it was mentioning something that needed to be mentioned. --awils1 13:10, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Detective Conan

I think it would be a good idea to point out the anime/manga series Detective Conan, about a highschool detective who gets shrunken into a child's size and continues to solve mysteries under the alias Conan Edogawa (after both Arthur Conan Doyle and Edogawa Rampo). Conan is a HUGE Sherlock Holmes fan and often talks about him.

There's a lot of literary references. I definitely think the movie, The Phantom of Baker Street is one, but I haven't watched it myself, so I'm just going by the title. ^^;

There's also the recent Baika Department store mystery, which Conan pointed out had similarities to The Dancing Men code from the novels.

Shinichi (Conan before he shrunk) was also able to find out things about people just by holding their hand, like figuring out that a girl was a gymnast based on the indention in her skin from training.

... sooo, yeah. Long story short, can Detective Conan please have a place? ^^;

The anime artists also sometimes do cute stuff like this:

http://www.beikacho.com/conan/images/detectiveboys.gif

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_v_O7ExrGg1g/TQULYlzUezI/AAAAAAAAAps/4dWhmFz5eHo/s320/detective-conan.jpg

xD;

Character Query

Just noted that the character "Anthea", evidently from BBC-Sherlock, is listed as a character here; that seems wrong for this page, which I'd understood to be explicitly about canon-Holmes material. Thoughts? --djonn 00:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

My mistake. I'll take her off. One question, should Mycroft Holmes go on this page? --Mrs. Potato Head 00:50, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not a BBC Sherlock fan - does that show have its own page yet? If so, I think Anthea could be moved there. I'm hesitant to define what's canon and what's not in Holmes-land; fanon outstrips everything here, and the books contain material many Holmes fans might not recognize. OTOH, adding in every popular adaptation-created character would overwhelm the page quickly. (Mrs. Potato-head, Mycroft is in the books and dozens of adaptations, so I think he's fine.) the old briar pipe 00:55, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

[To Mrs Potato Head]: Mycroft Holmes should definitely be there. The other characters that might go in are:

• Mrs Hudson, the 221b landlady.
• Sebastian Moran, Moriarty's second in command. I don't know if he appears in adaptations [he's not yet in Sherlock (BBC)], but he does turn up in fanfiction from time to time.
• Inspector G. Lestrade. Turns up in most adaptations. I don't think he has a forename in ACD canon.
• The only other one I can think of is Inspector Tobias Gregson. He's much rarer in fanfiction than Lestrade at the moment, but I believe he's in Elementary, so he'll probably increase in popularity. Espresso Addict 01:48, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Sources?

I've noticed the first paragraph in the section 'history' is entirely unsourced... which is strange to me because I don't think anyone working on the wiki was alive in the late 1800s. Does anyone happen to have the sources for that information? Itsevanffs (talk) 11:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

This is a good point, I will try my best to find some references -- Kingstoken (talk) 19:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)