What is Fan History? • What are Fan History's goals? • What are Fan History's rules? Intern with Fan History!

From Fan History Wiki

[edit] Organization

Does this category work as organized or should it be changed? --Laura 08:10, 7 December 2007 (CST)

[edit] Kerfluffles

In general, should Fan History Wiki be looking intentionally to document more kerfluffles or should that be left to develop organically and leave the intentional, purposeful kerfluffle documentation to Fandom Wank? --Laura 08:10, 7 December 2007 (CST)

Technical question: is there some way to edit the pervasive misspelling of 'kerfuffle' on this wiki without going through and changing every single instance? I've corrected the spelling in the Star Trek DS9 section, but it seems a waste of time to go through and correct individual misspellings if there's a way to do at least *some* group change... --Mark

Kerfluffle is a valid alternative spelling of kerfuffle[1] and actually used in fandom and, as the fandomwank terminology entry states[2], implies like a kerfuffle "only fizzier". Which goes with the rather silly and frivolous nature of most fan kerfluffles.--Sidewinder 15:51, 5 January 2008 (CST)

The only real (non-wiki) dictionary-like source I can find for "kerfluffle" is Etymonline, and given their etymology and lack of the more correct and common "kerfuffle", I strongly suspect it's a typo. If the mods here don't want it corrected, that's fine, but to me it sticks out like the idiocy of "loose" instead of "lose". Common usage within fandom doesn't make it right. --Mark

If it helps matters any, I hadn't heard of either variant in common use prior to lurking in various fandoms on LJ, and at that point I kept seeing "kerfluffle." I have been accordingly using "kerfluffle" when necessary to convey what I'm talking about when I post to said fandoms. --Lady Macbeth 17:41, 5 January 2008 (CST)

As I said, common usage within fandom doesn't make it right. :0) Would you use "loose" instead of "lose" on the front page of the wiki just because most of fandom doesn't know the difference? Of course not. Leaving "kerfluffle" uncorrected just because people in fandom can't spell "kerfuffle" is just as embarrassing to the wiki, IMO, and makes it look just as bad. --Mark

Does it bother you enough to go back to the word origin of kafuffle, which is the only variant that has an etymology attached to it in the online dictionary you're willing to accept? --Lady Macbeth 21:46, 5 January 2008 (CST)

Nope! :0) Just *being* in a dictionary is quite enough for me. ;0) --Mark

Go half way on it and change all instances of "kerfluffle" to "wank"? I think the term "wank" is pretty generally understood among fen, and the same spelling is used among fen as is used in the dictionary.  :D --Lady Macbeth 22:52, 5 January 2008 (CST)

That could work. A little harsher in connotation than kerfuffle, but better than a pet peeve spelling. :0) Provided, of course, that it's even possible to make such a change efficiently. Which brings us back to my original technical question. (I know very little about editing a wiki.) --Mark

There is wiki-editing software that can do it. Laura is having trouble making it work from her computer, and I'm brand-new to wiki editing, so it's not an option at this time. If we were to change it right now, we would have to go through over 4000 articles one-by-one and make the change on each individually. That's why the pages are designed to use the terminology that's most common in fandom in the first place. --Lady Macbeth 15:34, 6 January 2008 (CST)

Ah, I see that Laura--who I understand is the main lady here--reverted my edit on DS9 to the misspelling. Decision made, I suppose. :0) I'll revert my TNG correction and remove my name from the DS9 section. (The whole reason I started this discussion is that having my name even tangentially associated with a site containing such a prominent and annoying misspelling makes my brain itch.) --Mark

But it's not a misspelling. It's a fandom term, and this is a fandom wikipedia. -Jae 14:42, 7 January 2008 (CST)

It may be considered a fandom term by the fans who use it, but to a good number of fans and all outsiders it is a misspelling. As I said earlier, if you're going simply by common fan usage, you might as well use "loose" to mean "lose" on the front page of this wiki, and abandon all hope of being taken seriously.

Even granting that it has become a legitimate fandom term, part of writing for the public is using a term that the smallest number of people will consider incorrect, and avoiding jargon where possible. "Kerfuffle", a real word present in reputable dictionaries, is considered correct by all literate people. "Kerfluffle", a corruption of that word present only in fan discourse, is *at best* fannish jargon and at worst the ignorant mistake of people who never read anything *except* fan discourse.

Honestly, I never even considered the possibility that people could know of the real existence of "kerfuffle" and choose to use "kerfluffle" instead. I've always thought such people mustn't know there *is* a real word to misspell. I still think it needs changing if you have any hope of being taken seriously as a resource, but if it's a conscious choice rather than an error I feel better about letting it be. As long as my name stays off the wiki. :0) --Mark

Adding my belated two cents that "kerfluffle" takes away from the integrity of this whole project. It' an embarrassing error and Mark was right. I'd like to see Fan History succeed and have been reading it avidly but just came across this category and--ow. Really awful.

[edit] Category clean out

Mentioned above, but want to revisit it again This category really needs a clean out and some reorganization. I'm not quite sure how to tackle it myself. Anyone have any ideas? --Laura 10:35, 29 May 2008 (EDT)