Talk:Unauthorized Sequel

I think this page needs a broader title, as it's not just about sequels, but fans using other fanworks in their own works. I was going to call it "Unauthorized Sequels and Other Fanworks" but that doesn't seem to be clear enough. Ideas? --MPH (talk) 12:18, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

How about "Recursive Fanfiction"? TVTropes link It doesn't seem to be a term used by anyone quoted on the page now, but it's a more general term and I think it's more neutral, which would allow a wider perspective on the topic. Although, it's possible you meant this page to be just about the debate surrounding whether permission is needed to further transform a work (or, it's possible that that's what this page 'should' be about) in which case recursive fanfiction should get its own page, which I'd be happy to make. -- Hoopla (talk) 15:03, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

I like "recursive fanfiction," but tbh I've never heard it before DoS fandom, so I'd also be interested in information about the term itself and its use. This page appears to be mainly about the controversy surrounding fic of fic (there is some overlap between this page, Remix#Controversy, and Responsefic that could perhaps be streamlined), so perhaps something like "Unauthorized Recursive Fanfiction"? --Tiyire (talk) 17:22, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, that makes sense! I'll start working on Recursive Fanfiction tomorrow with what I know about it and see if I can dig anything else up. When you google it the first thing that comes up is the TVtropes page and the second is the DoS forums lmao my fandom doesn't mess around I guess. - Hoopla (talk) 06:50, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Unauthorized sequence situation

Years ago an author wrote a story of HP, snarry if memory serves me that became famous. With several chapters the work was remarkable until the author disappeared and someone claimed categorically that she had died of cancer. Sequels were produced in subsequent years. The author appeared some time later saying she was offended by the sequels, with the lie about her supposed death and ended the unfinished work. I cannot however remember the author's name or the work, but I think it would be a great addition to the article. A part about consequences of this kind of transformative work perhaps? -- Ellakbhesse (talk) 03:14, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

"Changes in Attitudes" section

Following a suggestion in the Featured Article nomination discussion for this page, I'm moving content from the "Changes in Attitudes Over Time" section to the Talk page. Anecdotally, I think the problem with these kinds of "placeholder" sections is that if we don't 100% know that they're needed on the page or that there's info to fill them out, they can wind up just hanging out on the page indefinitely.

Changes in Attitudes Over Time
Less strict? More strict?

Did the AO3 "inspired by" feature change anything? Ie, a way to acknowledge/link back to the original work, and a way for the original author to "endorse" the sequel?

I also think that the question about changes in attitudes over time is at least partly covered by the existing section "Different Attitudes in Different Fandoms/Different Times: A 2006 Discussion Among Pros Fans" and thus doesn't necessarily need a separate/additional section. However, the question about AO3's "inspired by" feature is worth considering, although since works only show up in that feature if they have been approved by the author, they're by implication endorsed. Thus, I'm wondering if that does make any difference to unauthorised sequels. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 21:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)