This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
novels,
novellas,
novelettes and
short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
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
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the
project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Reject mass merging of {Fantasy ~item~} article(s) as per no clear
consensus. Surely, some of these should be merged into a parent
Fantasy article until such a time as their content warrants stand-alone articles. Proposer – or others – should consider piecemeal proposals of individual, case-by-case article merger requests and discussions. Comments below warrant caution: 1) a lack of response does not mean
Bold mergers will not occur; 2) remember,
Other Stuff exists Non-Administrative closure--GenQuest"Talk to Me"01:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This article is pretty small and well within the scope of
Fantasy. I don't think people looking for information on fantasy literature should have to come here when there's already a well-written article simply under Fantasy. Fantasy needs to be expanded regardless of the issue of merging, though, and the scope of this article could be easily incorporated into it. Thoughts?
Pariah24 (
talk)
07:43, 4 October 2014 (UTC)reply
See also
#Rewrite (2006/2007, above). One thread of that exchange is, we need merger unless major rewrite with focus on the literary medium is undertaken adequately. I agree.
Editing articles myself --as editor always in literature context, almost always books and their writers-- always I link to the other article rather than this one. So, for instance, I write "
fantasy novel" rather than or "
fantasy novel".
The top "Media" portion of template {{fantasy}} --a navigation box displayed at top right of this article-- reveals much about how some of our editorial ancestors hoped to cover fantasy. (Consider also the warnings posted there and at template {{fantasy fiction}}.)
Evidently we now have something like 7 of 10 distinct media articles that were planned. Let me briefly classify the current targets of those "Media" links.
Anime --list of anime
[2a and 2b] Art (Fantastic) --nominally two articles but
Fantasy art and
Fantastic art have been merged
I think it would be best to have one major fantasy article, even if it has to be very long, as opposed to many articles by media type. A few auxiliary articles like
Fantasy author are okay, but I think a big split would be a bad idea. Better for the reader to have most of the info there in a primary article than to have them hopping around. Just my humble opinion. How do you suggest we move forward from here?
Pariah24┃☏07:22, 29 November 2014 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Duplication with "History of fantasy"
After starting editing this article, I realise that there is a parallel article
History of fantasy, which focusses also on literature. Can anyone explain why WP needs these two articles? As far as I can see the previous merge discussion doesn't include this duplication of subject matter.
Rwood128 (
talk)
17:15, 24 May 2017 (UTC)reply
See also Fantasy: "History"
[1]. Perhaps
History of fantasy should also be re-named "History of fantasy literature", as there is also the article
Fantasy which deals with all media. This would reflect the contents of "History of fantasy" less ambiguously.
Rwood128 (
talk)
17:32, 24 May 2017 (UTC)reply
There are sources citing Sword of Shannara being the first paperback fiction to be in the New York Times bestseller list. Whilst a minor point, I feel that since it was published in 1977, long before many other High Fantasy novels that its an important landmark to put into the article.
This article really needs a total overhaul. It's incredibly small, frankly, for such an expansive topic. It is incredibly shallow and far too narrow in its focus. I came here intending to add details about Chinese fantasy literature only to find out that there's not even a single reference to the topic! To say nothing of Japanese and various other national fantasy literatures. Reference to wuxia, for instance, belongs here, as well as shenmo.
@
Olivaw-Daneel: No, that's no less a shoddy article. It frankly amazes me that something as popular as fantasy has such dismal pages on Wikipedia. Even the wuxia page is better, despite being a little-known genre in the West!