Talk:Fan fiction

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fan fiction article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 365 days

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 7, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed

This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of May 2, 2005.

Literature Low‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet culture Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Electronic literature

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electronic literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic literatureTemplate:WikiProject Electronic literatureElectronic literature articles

Archives

1, 2, 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by when more than 10 sections are present.

Fanon ≠ Fanfiction

Fanon is a portmanteau of the words "fanatic" and "canon", and refers to concepts within fanfiction considered rote even though it was never expressed within the original stories. This is not the same as fanfiction so I don't think it belongs in bold alongside "FF" and "fanfic" at the top of the page, which implies it to be a synonym. However, the concept is related to fan fiction, and there's even a section called "Relationship to canon" on the Fandom page, that would well do with the term and an explanation of the differences between canon and fanon. 2001:44B8:218A:D00:F8DD:B565:E937:FE90 (talk) 11:11, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  "The canon of fandom. Fanon is the collection concepts and ideas that are normally used in most fan fiction, but don't really existence in the real story's canon." That's from the urban dictionary. So, this disproves it >_< sorry.

Your faithful Wikipedian, 2605:A601:A42:9E00:F0E7:6B4B:E49F:CC57 (talk) 23:29, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional Cities in fanfiction?

Any fictional cities in fanfiction by fan authors as fanfictional? 124.106.141.70 (talk) 08:08, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Yes.
2605:A601:A42:9E00:F0E7:6B4B:E49F:CC57 (talk) 23:24, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OTPs: Stydia vs Sterek

Is there a good reason to list Sterek instead of Stydia in the OTP section? It looks like people are changing this, without providing any reason, and it looks approximately political, so I worry both about leaving it and changing it. (See the first change, and a fix to it; then a revert I performed as part of further editing; then a revert of my revert.)

Since none of the section is sourced, should we just find a list of common OTPs, somewhere, and list only those, with a source? Throne3d (talk) 14:35, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Vandalism is causing the wrong listing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:A42:9E00:F0E7:6B4B:E49F:CC57 (talk) 23:26, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What's The Difference Between Fanon And Canon?

Can someone please explain to me what the difference between fanon fanfiction and canon fanfiction is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.118.92.186 (talk) 18:45, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fanfiction should be prioritized over fan fiction

As someone who is a part of fanfiction culture, I can tell you it’s rarely - if ever - spelled with a space. When someone does spell it with a space, that come across as someone unfamiliar to the scene. I’d edit it, but I’m sure the edits would get rolled back by someone. Durinae (talk) 22:39, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-television fan fiction?

Is 'fan fiction' the appropriate page (and if so, is 'fan fiction' the appropriate term) for works of fiction (including published works) appropriating from other fiction (without authorisation); and produced before the advent of television such as the extensive unauthorised works of Sherlock Holmes?--Darrelljon (talk) 12:44, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would say yes, since they follow the same principle. Lolak2 (talk) 16:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Definitions

I think there should be definitions added, I would be willing to do so. I don’t know exactly how to write nor the preferred format on this site to do so. Most likely though I would suggest a chart explaining Abbreviations, direct meaning and actual meaning. The reason I opt for this is due to the fact I often get confused myself and would like to extend this knowledge publicly. 2600:1700:AF90:5550:49AE:A90B:C326:B0B2 (talk) 02:50, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The subject is clearly defined and its common abbreviations are given. What, precisely, do you think the article lacks?—Anita5192 (talk) 03:03, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Fanfictions

I've recently come upon the article for the fanficton "All the young dudes". I don't think any singular fanfiction is significant enough to warrant their own article. But notable fanfictions could get an honorable mention here. (I would consider notable fanfiction as ones that have broken records, are especially popular or have changed the genre in some way.) Lolak2 (talk) 16:15, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What other ones would you include? First that comes to my mind is obviously "My Immortal", which (deservedly, I think) already has its own page, and surprisingly isn't mentioned in this one; then "Heat Waves" and "Sexy Times With Wangxian", and maybe a handful of more notorious ones. I'm not sure there are enough to warrant a whole section, given that fics tend to stay in fandom circles. GulfOfPerdition (talk) 03:29, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with adding a list of "notable" fics; this page is about the concept of fan fiction and imo shouldn't mention any title, unless a fic single-handedly changed the genre, which from my understanding never happened since it was more of a fandom effort, particularly from the Star Trek one.

If a specific fan fiction was covered by a significant number of third-parties reliable sources or, even better, was the subject of academic studies to the point of justifying a separate article about it, that could be added to the "See also" section. As for the rest of them, as GulfOfPerdition noted, they tend to stay in fandom circles (and, I'll add, most authors prefer it that way), and their present popularity doesn't guarantee long-term significance. Chiya^ko92 09:01, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I struck my suggestion to add articles about fan fiction to the "See also" section because there's already a category for them with over 30 works, too many to be added under "See also". --Chiya^ko92 09:15, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction missing citations

Lots of uncited statements in the introduction. Are there any sources for the definition and description of fanfiction? - Marvelousbench (talk) 13:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic definition

The article currently says "The author uses copyrighted characters, settings, or other intellectual properties from the original creator(s) as a basis for their writing and can retain the original characters and settings, add their own, or both." The requirement that someone must legally own the derived work is curious; surely, we can discuss "Oz fanfic" even though the material by the original author has been in the public domain for a while with no intellectual property remaining. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 20:24, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]