Category talk:Fan terminology - Revision history

Abates: /* What actually belongs here? */

2014-04-20T09:15:10Z

What actually belongs here?

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:15, 20 April 2014
Line 11:		Line 11:
	==What actually belongs here?==		==What actually belongs here?==
	That pretty much says it all. We seem to have consensus to prune this category, but I'm not entirely sure what should stay. Ideas? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 13 September 2010 (EDT)		That pretty much says it all. We seem to have consensus to prune this category, but I'm not entirely sure what should stay. Ideas? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 13 September 2010 (EDT)
	:Unofficial terminology that had/has widespread use in at least one corner of the [[fandom]]. So [[kibble]] but not [[Rainmaker]] or [[Darksyde]] since the latter are official and not fan terminology. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:43, 13 September 2010 (EDT)		:Unofficial terminology that had/has widespread use in at least one corner of the [[fandom]]. So [[kibble]] but not [[Rainmaker]] or [[Darksyde (BW)\|Darksyde]] since the latter are official and not fan terminology. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:43, 13 September 2010 (EDT)
	::Okay, I've removed any terms that have been canonized and any that were simply toy industry terms picked up by fans. At least I think I have. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 19:11, 14 September 2010 (EDT)		::Okay, I've removed any terms that have been canonized and any that were simply toy industry terms picked up by fans. At least I think I have. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 19:11, 14 September 2010 (EDT)


	== CHUG ==		== CHUG ==

Khajidha: /* CHUG */

2010-11-03T16:41:51Z

CHUG

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:41, 3 November 2010
Line 20:		Line 20:
	::"Classics-Henkei-Universe-Generations".--[[User:-Blackout-\|-Blackout-]] 12:24, 3 November 2010 (EDT)		::"Classics-Henkei-Universe-Generations".--[[User:-Blackout-\|-Blackout-]] 12:24, 3 November 2010 (EDT)
	:::No, I don't think we need an article on this. I mean, it would barely be one sentence.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 12:26, 3 November 2010 (EDT)		:::No, I don't think we need an article on this. I mean, it would barely be one sentence.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 12:26, 3 November 2010 (EDT)
			::::I'm not even sure I understand why the term exists. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:41, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

Rosicrucian: /* CHUG */

2010-11-03T16:26:02Z

CHUG

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:26, 3 November 2010
Line 19:		Line 19:
	:What does it mean? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:23, 3 November 2010 (EDT)		:What does it mean? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:23, 3 November 2010 (EDT)
	::"Classics-Henkei-Universe-Generations".--[[User:-Blackout-\|-Blackout-]] 12:24, 3 November 2010 (EDT)		::"Classics-Henkei-Universe-Generations".--[[User:-Blackout-\|-Blackout-]] 12:24, 3 November 2010 (EDT)
			:::No, I don't think we need an article on this. I mean, it would barely be one sentence.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 12:26, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

-Blackout-: /* CHUG */

2010-11-03T16:24:59Z

CHUG

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:24, 3 November 2010
Line 18:		Line 18:
	Has that term come into use enough for it to have an article? On TFW2005 it's commonly used but im not sure about on other websites.--[[User:Fredbob\|Fredbob]] 23:11, 2 November 2010 (EDT)		Has that term come into use enough for it to have an article? On TFW2005 it's commonly used but im not sure about on other websites.--[[User:Fredbob\|Fredbob]] 23:11, 2 November 2010 (EDT)
	:What does it mean? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:23, 3 November 2010 (EDT)		:What does it mean? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:23, 3 November 2010 (EDT)
			::"Classics-Henkei-Universe-Generations".--[[User:-Blackout-\|-Blackout-]] 12:24, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

Khajidha: /* CHUG */

2010-11-03T16:23:09Z

CHUG

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:23, 3 November 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:

	== Industry terms ==		== Industry terms ==

Line 18:		Line 17:
	== CHUG ==		== CHUG ==
	Has that term come into use enough for it to have an article? On TFW2005 it's commonly used but im not sure about on other websites.--[[User:Fredbob\|Fredbob]] 23:11, 2 November 2010 (EDT)		Has that term come into use enough for it to have an article? On TFW2005 it's commonly used but im not sure about on other websites.--[[User:Fredbob\|Fredbob]] 23:11, 2 November 2010 (EDT)
			:What does it mean? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:23, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

Fredbob at 03:11, 3 November 2010

2010-11-03T03:11:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:11, 3 November 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:

	== Industry terms ==		== Industry terms ==

Line 13:		Line 14:
	:Unofficial terminology that had/has widespread use in at least one corner of the [[fandom]]. So [[kibble]] but not [[Rainmaker]] or [[Darksyde]] since the latter are official and not fan terminology. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:43, 13 September 2010 (EDT)		:Unofficial terminology that had/has widespread use in at least one corner of the [[fandom]]. So [[kibble]] but not [[Rainmaker]] or [[Darksyde]] since the latter are official and not fan terminology. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:43, 13 September 2010 (EDT)
	::Okay, I've removed any terms that have been canonized and any that were simply toy industry terms picked up by fans. At least I think I have. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 19:11, 14 September 2010 (EDT)		::Okay, I've removed any terms that have been canonized and any that were simply toy industry terms picked up by fans. At least I think I have. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 19:11, 14 September 2010 (EDT)


			== CHUG ==
			Has that term come into use enough for it to have an article? On TFW2005 it's commonly used but im not sure about on other websites.--[[User:Fredbob\|Fredbob]] 23:11, 2 November 2010 (EDT)

Khajidha: /* What actually belongs here? */

2010-09-14T23:11:54Z

What actually belongs here?

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:11, 14 September 2010
Line 12:		Line 12:
	That pretty much says it all. We seem to have consensus to prune this category, but I'm not entirely sure what should stay. Ideas? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 13 September 2010 (EDT)		That pretty much says it all. We seem to have consensus to prune this category, but I'm not entirely sure what should stay. Ideas? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 13 September 2010 (EDT)
	:Unofficial terminology that had/has widespread use in at least one corner of the [[fandom]]. So [[kibble]] but not [[Rainmaker]] or [[Darksyde]] since the latter are official and not fan terminology. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:43, 13 September 2010 (EDT)		:Unofficial terminology that had/has widespread use in at least one corner of the [[fandom]]. So [[kibble]] but not [[Rainmaker]] or [[Darksyde]] since the latter are official and not fan terminology. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:43, 13 September 2010 (EDT)
			::Okay, I've removed any terms that have been canonized and any that were simply toy industry terms picked up by fans. At least I think I have. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 19:11, 14 September 2010 (EDT)

Starfield: /* What actually belongs here? */

2010-09-13T14:43:15Z

What actually belongs here?

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:43, 13 September 2010
Line 11:		Line 11:
	==What actually belongs here?==		==What actually belongs here?==
	That pretty much says it all. We seem to have consensus to prune this category, but I'm not entirely sure what should stay. Ideas? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 13 September 2010 (EDT)		That pretty much says it all. We seem to have consensus to prune this category, but I'm not entirely sure what should stay. Ideas? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 13 September 2010 (EDT)
			:Unofficial terminology that had/has widespread use in at least one corner of the [[fandom]]. So [[kibble]] but not [[Rainmaker]] or [[Darksyde]] since the latter are official and not fan terminology. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:43, 13 September 2010 (EDT)

Khajidha at 14:14, 13 September 2010

2010-09-13T14:14:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:14, 13 September 2010
Line 8:		Line 8:
	I don't think putting the whole [[:Category:Nameless nickname\|Nameless nickname category]] into "fan terminology" is appropriate. They aren't, for the most part, names that fans use, they are just names assigned for the sake of making an article on the wiki. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:04, 2 September 2010 (EDT)		I don't think putting the whole [[:Category:Nameless nickname\|Nameless nickname category]] into "fan terminology" is appropriate. They aren't, for the most part, names that fans use, they are just names assigned for the sake of making an article on the wiki. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:04, 2 September 2010 (EDT)
	:Agreed, this category needs rethinking before we continue using it. It may be a useful category, but we must be absolutely clear what belongs in it. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 2 September 2010 (EDT)		:Agreed, this category needs rethinking before we continue using it. It may be a useful category, but we must be absolutely clear what belongs in it. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 2 September 2010 (EDT)

			==What actually belongs here?==
			That pretty much says it all. We seem to have consensus to prune this category, but I'm not entirely sure what should stay. Ideas? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 13 September 2010 (EDT)

Khajidha at 14:14, 2 September 2010

2010-09-02T14:14:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:14, 2 September 2010
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Some of these (mold, sprue, redeco, etc) are industry terms the fandom has picked up on. Should they be removed from fan terminology and placed in a new "industry terminology" category, allowed to be in both categories, or left as is? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 1 September 2010 (EDT)		Some of these (mold, sprue, redeco, etc) are industry terms the fandom has picked up on. Should they be removed from fan terminology and placed in a new "industry terminology" category, allowed to be in both categories, or left as is? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 1 September 2010 (EDT)
	:They're used by fans in different ways than the industry definitions. That's why they're included in here. Example: "Mold" - industry definition: "Tooling"; fan definition: "Sculpt". Also why I '''didn't''' include "redeco" (which has no fandom usage that ~~derivates~~ from the industry definition).--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] 14:01, 1 September 2010 (EDT)		:They're used by fans in different ways than the industry definitions. That's why they're included in here. Example: "Mold" - industry definition: "Tooling"; fan definition: "Sculpt". Also why I '''didn't''' include "redeco" (which has no fandom usage that deviates from the industry definition).--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] 14:01, 1 September 2010 (EDT)
	::That's not at all clear to anyone but you, and I don't find their inclusion in this category at all useful. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 09:26, 2 September 2010 (EDT)		::That's not at all clear to anyone but you, and I don't find their inclusion in this category at all useful. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 09:26, 2 September 2010 (EDT)
	:::The articles in question mention the ~~derivating~~ fan usage right in their introductory paragraphs, don't they? But then again, it's not something worth an argument about. If nobody agrees with my point, feel free to remove them from the category. I won't fight to keep them in.--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] 10:02, 2 September 2010 (EDT)		:::The articles in question mention the deviating fan usage right in their introductory paragraphs, don't they? But then again, it's not something worth an argument about. If nobody agrees with my point, feel free to remove them from the category. I won't fight to keep them in.--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] 10:02, 2 September 2010 (EDT)
	::I think you are seeing fan usage of some of these as being different when other people don't agree. You stated that the industry uses mold to mean the tooling and fandom uses it to mean the sculpt. But I often say and hear other people say that two figures share a mold, which could be interpreted either way, industry usage probably covers both alternatives as well. Even if the different definitions were more distinct, calling fan usage (even incorrect usage) of an industry term a fan term just seems wrong (or at least misleading). --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 09:26, 2 September 2010 (EDT) (reposted here to maintain a more condensed discussion --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 09:43, 2 September 2010 (EDT))		::I think you are seeing fan usage of some of these as being different when other people don't agree. You stated that the industry uses mold to mean the tooling and fandom uses it to mean the sculpt. But I often say and hear other people say that two figures share a mold, which could be interpreted either way, industry usage probably covers both alternatives as well. Even if the different definitions were more distinct, calling fan usage (even incorrect usage) of an industry term a fan term just seems wrong (or at least misleading). --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 09:26, 2 September 2010 (EDT) (reposted here to maintain a more condensed discussion --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 09:43, 2 September 2010 (EDT))
	I don't think putting the whole [[:Category:Nameless nickname\|Nameless nickname category]] into "fan terminology" is appropriate. They aren't, for the most part, names that fans use, they are just names assigned for the sake of making an article on the wiki. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:04, 2 September 2010 (EDT)		I don't think putting the whole [[:Category:Nameless nickname\|Nameless nickname category]] into "fan terminology" is appropriate. They aren't, for the most part, names that fans use, they are just names assigned for the sake of making an article on the wiki. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:04, 2 September 2010 (EDT)
			:Agreed, this category needs rethinking before we continue using it. It may be a useful category, but we must be absolutely clear what belongs in it. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 2 September 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:41, 3 November 2010
Line 20:		Line 20:
	::"Classics-Henkei-Universe-Generations".--[[User:-Blackout-\|-Blackout-]] 12:24, 3 November 2010 (EDT)		::"Classics-Henkei-Universe-Generations".--[[User:-Blackout-\|-Blackout-]] 12:24, 3 November 2010 (EDT)
	:::No, I don't think we need an article on this. I mean, it would barely be one sentence.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 12:26, 3 November 2010 (EDT)		:::No, I don't think we need an article on this. I mean, it would barely be one sentence.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 12:26, 3 November 2010 (EDT)
			::::I'm not even sure I understand why the term exists. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:41, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:26, 3 November 2010
Line 19:		Line 19:
	:What does it mean? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:23, 3 November 2010 (EDT)		:What does it mean? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:23, 3 November 2010 (EDT)
	::"Classics-Henkei-Universe-Generations".--[[User:-Blackout-\|-Blackout-]] 12:24, 3 November 2010 (EDT)		::"Classics-Henkei-Universe-Generations".--[[User:-Blackout-\|-Blackout-]] 12:24, 3 November 2010 (EDT)
			:::No, I don't think we need an article on this. I mean, it would barely be one sentence.--[[User:Rosicrucian\|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian\|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 12:26, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:24, 3 November 2010
Line 18:		Line 18:
	Has that term come into use enough for it to have an article? On TFW2005 it's commonly used but im not sure about on other websites.--[[User:Fredbob\|Fredbob]] 23:11, 2 November 2010 (EDT)		Has that term come into use enough for it to have an article? On TFW2005 it's commonly used but im not sure about on other websites.--[[User:Fredbob\|Fredbob]] 23:11, 2 November 2010 (EDT)
	:What does it mean? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:23, 3 November 2010 (EDT)		:What does it mean? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:23, 3 November 2010 (EDT)
			::"Classics-Henkei-Universe-Generations".--[[User:-Blackout-\|-Blackout-]] 12:24, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:11, 14 September 2010
Line 12:		Line 12:
	That pretty much says it all. We seem to have consensus to prune this category, but I'm not entirely sure what should stay. Ideas? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 13 September 2010 (EDT)		That pretty much says it all. We seem to have consensus to prune this category, but I'm not entirely sure what should stay. Ideas? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 13 September 2010 (EDT)
	:Unofficial terminology that had/has widespread use in at least one corner of the [[fandom]]. So [[kibble]] but not [[Rainmaker]] or [[Darksyde]] since the latter are official and not fan terminology. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:43, 13 September 2010 (EDT)		:Unofficial terminology that had/has widespread use in at least one corner of the [[fandom]]. So [[kibble]] but not [[Rainmaker]] or [[Darksyde]] since the latter are official and not fan terminology. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:43, 13 September 2010 (EDT)
			::Okay, I've removed any terms that have been canonized and any that were simply toy industry terms picked up by fans. At least I think I have. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 19:11, 14 September 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:14, 2 September 2010
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Some of these (mold, sprue, redeco, etc) are industry terms the fandom has picked up on. Should they be removed from fan terminology and placed in a new "industry terminology" category, allowed to be in both categories, or left as is? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 1 September 2010 (EDT)		Some of these (mold, sprue, redeco, etc) are industry terms the fandom has picked up on. Should they be removed from fan terminology and placed in a new "industry terminology" category, allowed to be in both categories, or left as is? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 1 September 2010 (EDT)
	:They're used by fans in different ways than the industry definitions. That's why they're included in here. Example: "Mold" - industry definition: "Tooling"; fan definition: "Sculpt". Also why I '''didn't''' include "redeco" (which has no fandom usage that ~~derivates~~ from the industry definition).--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] 14:01, 1 September 2010 (EDT)		:They're used by fans in different ways than the industry definitions. That's why they're included in here. Example: "Mold" - industry definition: "Tooling"; fan definition: "Sculpt". Also why I '''didn't''' include "redeco" (which has no fandom usage that deviates from the industry definition).--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] 14:01, 1 September 2010 (EDT)
	::That's not at all clear to anyone but you, and I don't find their inclusion in this category at all useful. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 09:26, 2 September 2010 (EDT)		::That's not at all clear to anyone but you, and I don't find their inclusion in this category at all useful. --[[User:ItsWalky\|ItsWalky]] 09:26, 2 September 2010 (EDT)
	:::The articles in question mention the ~~derivating~~ fan usage right in their introductory paragraphs, don't they? But then again, it's not something worth an argument about. If nobody agrees with my point, feel free to remove them from the category. I won't fight to keep them in.--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] 10:02, 2 September 2010 (EDT)		:::The articles in question mention the deviating fan usage right in their introductory paragraphs, don't they? But then again, it's not something worth an argument about. If nobody agrees with my point, feel free to remove them from the category. I won't fight to keep them in.--[[User:Nevermore\|Nevermore]] 10:02, 2 September 2010 (EDT)
	::I think you are seeing fan usage of some of these as being different when other people don't agree. You stated that the industry uses mold to mean the tooling and fandom uses it to mean the sculpt. But I often say and hear other people say that two figures share a mold, which could be interpreted either way, industry usage probably covers both alternatives as well. Even if the different definitions were more distinct, calling fan usage (even incorrect usage) of an industry term a fan term just seems wrong (or at least misleading). --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 09:26, 2 September 2010 (EDT) (reposted here to maintain a more condensed discussion --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 09:43, 2 September 2010 (EDT))		::I think you are seeing fan usage of some of these as being different when other people don't agree. You stated that the industry uses mold to mean the tooling and fandom uses it to mean the sculpt. But I often say and hear other people say that two figures share a mold, which could be interpreted either way, industry usage probably covers both alternatives as well. Even if the different definitions were more distinct, calling fan usage (even incorrect usage) of an industry term a fan term just seems wrong (or at least misleading). --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 09:26, 2 September 2010 (EDT) (reposted here to maintain a more condensed discussion --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 09:43, 2 September 2010 (EDT))
	I don't think putting the whole [[:Category:Nameless nickname\|Nameless nickname category]] into "fan terminology" is appropriate. They aren't, for the most part, names that fans use, they are just names assigned for the sake of making an article on the wiki. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:04, 2 September 2010 (EDT)		I don't think putting the whole [[:Category:Nameless nickname\|Nameless nickname category]] into "fan terminology" is appropriate. They aren't, for the most part, names that fans use, they are just names assigned for the sake of making an article on the wiki. - [[User:Starfield\|Starfield]] 10:04, 2 September 2010 (EDT)
			:Agreed, this category needs rethinking before we continue using it. It may be a useful category, but we must be absolutely clear what belongs in it. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 10:14, 2 September 2010 (EDT)