Talk:Fanon: Difference between revisions
From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Deceptitran (talk | contribs) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:You'd think. A thing that just one person believes isn't fanon, it's just fanfic. Fanon, to me, implies that there's a general degree of acceptance, or at least knowledge, of the belief. The Raksha-style view of the Decepticons is widespread enough to be fanon. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 12:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC) | :You'd think. A thing that just one person believes isn't fanon, it's just fanfic. Fanon, to me, implies that there's a general degree of acceptance, or at least knowledge, of the belief. The Raksha-style view of the Decepticons is widespread enough to be fanon. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 12:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC) | ||
After looking at the Drift and Squadron X pages, I realized that the Wiki doesn't have a place where "Fanwank" is properly described. I was thinking that this article would be improved by adding the definition, but was wondering what those funnier and wiser than I thought. Should Fanwank go here? Get it's own article? Remain undefined? What? -[[User:Gearbox|Gearbox]] | |||
Revision as of 06:32, 2 June 2010
- "Fanon is a so-called "fact" that a fan thinks is true, but for which there is no evidence in any official material. A piece of fanon may be a belief held by just a single fan, or a belief which is widespread due to having been discussed and picked up by other fans."
See, I thought it had to be widespread to qualify as "actual fanon" in the first place... - SanityOrMadness 18:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- You'd think. A thing that just one person believes isn't fanon, it's just fanfic. Fanon, to me, implies that there's a general degree of acceptance, or at least knowledge, of the belief. The Raksha-style view of the Decepticons is widespread enough to be fanon. -hx 12:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
After looking at the Drift and Squadron X pages, I realized that the Wiki doesn't have a place where "Fanwank" is properly described. I was thinking that this article would be improved by adding the definition, but was wondering what those funnier and wiser than I thought. Should Fanwank go here? Get it's own article? Remain undefined? What? -Gearbox
