Category talk:Fan terminology: Difference between revisions
From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
: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 derivates 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) | ||
::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)) | |||
Revision as of 13:43, 2 September 2010
Industry terms
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? --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).--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. --ItsWalky 09:26, 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). --Khajidha 09:26, 2 September 2010 (EDT) (reposted here to maintain a more condensed discussion --Khajidha 09:43, 2 September 2010 (EDT))
