Talk: Star Trek parodies and pop culture references (literature)

Revision as of 16:08, 20 April 2015

Help with this?

Is this an appropriate way to list these? --LauraCC (talk) 17:07, April 18, 2015 (UTC)

Well, we don't generally cover stuff that that is neither canon nor licensed so this page will probably have to be merged at best - but depending on the intended direction info like this might perhaps find a place either as a new section under fan fiction or maybe at Star Trek parodies and pop culture references (literature). -- Capricorn (talk) 19:40, April 18, 2015 (UTC)

I would agree that this be merged into Star Trek parodies and pop culture references (literature). In fact, I think one or two of these are already in there. --| TrekFan ^{Open a channel} 21:48, April 18, 2015 (UTC)

I've put up the merge template. Does the original creator have any more input on this? What exactly her plans are for further development in this page might be interesting to know in light of a future merge. -- Capricorn (talk) 16:54, April 19, 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it's literature - doesn't that refer to novels, non-fiction books etc, as opposed to something that begins online and doesn't always get printed?--LauraCC (talk) 17:07, April 19, 2015 (UTC)

It's a case of logic creep basically; comics were put there for lack of a better place, and once comics were there it was only logical that web comics would also be there. I've been thinking of proposing a split for a while now tbh, the number of mentioned comics is large enough these days that it might make sense. Meh, I suppose today is as good a day to bring that up as any day. -- Capricorn (talk) 17:31, April 19, 2015 (UTC)

A comic is a piece of literature. It's a written thing. It's literature. -- sulfur (talk) 00:55, April 20, 2015 (UTC)

Yes, technically, but I still think the page might benefit from a split; it reads a bit awkward to have books and comics mixed together on that page. For one, every almost every section about comics nescesarily starts with a variant of the phrase "this is a comic". This is the wrong page to discuss that though, sorry. -- Capricorn (talk) 08:41, April 20, 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid I agree with sulfur on this one. Comics, even internet based ones, are a piece of literature. Just because it isn't printed and bound in a book of the traditional sense doesn't mean it isn't a piece of written work that one would read. I still vote for this to be merged into the literature article. --| TrekFan ^{Open a channel} 16:08, April 20, 2015 (UTC)

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 :::A comic is a piece of literature. It's a written thing. It's literature. -- [[User:Sulfur|sulfur]] ([[User talk:Sulfur|talk]]) 00:55, April 20, 2015 (UTC)
 :Yes, technically, but I still think the page might benefit from a split; it reads a bit awkward to have books and comics mixed together on that page. For one, every almost every section about comics nescesarily starts with a variant of the phrase "this is a comic". This is the wrong page to discuss that though, sorry. -- [[User:Capricorn|Capricorn]] ([[User talk:Capricorn|talk]]) 08:41, April 20, 2015 (UTC)
+::I'm afraid I agree with sulfur on this one. Comics, even internet based ones, are a piece of literature. Just because it isn't printed and bound in a book of the traditional sense doesn't mean it isn't a piece of written work that one would read. I still vote for this to be merged into the literature article. --| [[User:TrekFan|TrekFan]] <sup>[[User Talk:TrekFan|<span style="color:#00FF00;">Open a channel</span>]]</sup> 16:08, April 20, 2015 (UTC)