Talk:X-men
From Fan History Wiki
Contents |
[edit] Frito said ...
- And if the terms aren't use by many people, might be why they should be included no? That way those not familiar with it can learn them? Worst comes to worst, those terms can always be compiled on a page where the section says "See Terminology used in the X-Men fandom."? --Laura 11:02, 2 January 2008 (CST)
THey're not used because a large portion of the fandom is aware of them and LOATHES them. It has nothing to do with not being aware. They just hate them and consider them annoying. However, since I'm making a seperate pairings page, they can be included in the major pairings articles--Frito 11:19, 2 January 2008 (CST)
- Whether or not a "large portion" of the fandom "loathes" certain pairing terms, they are in use. A quick google search of X-Men and several of these terms quickly shows their use in tagging youtube fan vids, stories, etc. I vote for adding the pairing terms back in, as similar information is used in other wiki entries for fandoms with large numbers of characters and pairings. --Sidewinder 11:40, 2 January 2008 (CST)
- It's CLUTTER. At the least, each one doesn't need a single line - they can get a paragraphical statement, and not take up 10-15-20 lines of the page. I vote for nuking them from orbit.--Frito 11:46, 2 January 2008 (CST)
[edit] This edit...
This edit... THAT is the general fandom page. The information regarding movie release dates, etc. give context to when things were happening in relation to various fandom events. It just needs to be filled in more around. The dead citations were left because that is still where that information came from, even if it no longer exists. And information on multifandom activities which include X-Men show where the fandom is crossing over with other fandoms... so not certain why a lot of that was removed as not relevant. As I'm not in the fandom (anymore. Was briefly in it after the first movie), I could be wrong... but can I have more detailed explanation as to why that stuff was removed? --Laura 11:02, 2 January 2008 (CST)
[edit] Removals
General fandom note should go to a general fandom-wide page - it's not really relevant for someone looking for the specific history of the X-Men to see several links that go to generic pages. The pairings fics, terminology lists, etc are being moved to seperate pages. This sort of thing is a pretty standard wiki practice as pages get bigger. Pull out the generic stuff, and move specific things to their own pages.
(IE: A pairings page, removing empty listings, adding the older history. I'm not just willfully removing the Remy/Rogue stuff - I'm just remanding it over to it's own page so it can get a full article instead of a mention on a main page. It means the Scott/Jean, Logan/Jean, Scott/Emma, etc, etc can not get overshadowed.)
[edit] Shipping
FYI? There's no shipping 'wank' incoming. I don't ship *anything* - I recognize that the ships are important to the history of the fandom (God knows I was around for the heyday of Remy/Rogue) - I just think that they belong on seperate pages. If we listed every single ship, every member of the fandom, the page would be to long to read and/or would read like an advertisement for one particular ship. It's better to put them on seperate pages where each 'ship can get the attention it deserves from fans that care, and where it WON'T start wank because the Remy/Rogue people are pissy that Emma/Scott got 9 lines on the page or vice versa.--Frito 11:58, 2 January 2008 (CST)
[edit] Dex said ...
Just to clarify, we're doing the comic fandom here, right? Not the history of the X-Men books, but the fandom? And there will be an entry under Movies and Cartoons covering the other media, because the two fandoms were very seperate.
I've got potentially lined up some of the earliest creators (Hawk, Luba, Dandelion, Darqstar, Susan Crites, etc) to contribute, but I want to be absolutely sure before I get them involved that I understand what we're doing?
--Dex 14:58, 2 January 2008 (CST)
[edit] Dandesun said ...
Well, it certainly looks to be about the fandom rather than any kind of encyclopedic knowledge of the comic book industry or specific titles.
I took a quick gander at some of the others and they list things like when sites opened, effects that movies or episodes or books had on various amounts of fanwank and the like. I haven't delved too deeply but it is about the fandoms more so than the actual product.
--Dandesun 16:15, 2 January 2008 (CST)
[edit] Dex said ...
Hmm... after looking over the construction of the site, I think the lack of any specific understanding of the complexity of the comic fandom is going to render this a somewhat confusing endevour. For example, the X-Men have over 500 canonical relationships in the comics alone, not counting solely fanbased ones. The flagship title, the Uncanny X-Men, has had over 300 seperate creators on the book. Trying to document those details, along with the details of the movies, cartoons, manga, and other media simultaniously is simply too much content with too little context.
Also, the intermeshing of different media is badly misrepresenting the nature of comics fandom, as intercomic work (writing between various comics, such as the X-Men, Hellblazer, and WildCATS) was far more common than intermedia work (writing movieverse, EVO, and comics). My suggestion would be that since this format is based around the dynamics of a more traditional fandom like Harry Potter, or LotR, you may wish to mostly ignore the actual comic part of fandom, and focus on the media adaptions, which better suit this kind of structure.
Anyhow, best of luck with the site! Fandom History is an important and over looked topic, and I bet a lot of people will appreciate all your hard work!
--Dex 11:16, 3 January 2008 (CST)
[edit] External Links
Should the Fanlib link be removed, or is there a reason to keep the dead link on as part of the external links? 75.2.18.9 04:12, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
- I can, and will, add a {{Citation to dead link}}. --Tikatu 04:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
That 'pairing' terminology list is used ONLY by a very small part of the fandom and takes up an inappropiate amount of space on the page for the very small number of people who actually use the terms. --Frito 11:58, 2 January 2008 (CST) --Frito 10:43, 2 January 2008 (CST)