I think having separate categories is good, and I like the ones you've offered. We might want to make a category wishlist and put it somewhere for when there are actually pages to put in each category. Either way, RPG definitely needs to be sorted into LARP, Tabletop, Online and MMORPG at the bare minimum. In fact, I would go ahead and make those top-level subcats under "Games", rather than adding an RPG layer that would only add clicks for users.
I think of them as "fandom by source text," but there's some disagreement about that.
I'm not sure how to explain this the way I mean it, but sometimes how something looks to outsiders is not the bar one should use for deciding how to define a fandom. Fanlore is about inclusion, which means fangroups defining and explaining themselves, rather than having those explanations or definitions imposed from the outside, even by fans from other communities. So I would look seriously at chomiji's comment above, but not at the comments of folks who don't game, except to try to make clarifying statements where needed.
For me personally, the gaming divisions go something like this: - Community = the gaming community at large, probably divided into online and in-person and some other finer distinctions depending on how you want to slice it. - Canon Types = types of games, with many having subdivisions (flash games, RPGs, card games, and board games would all have obvious subcats). - Source Texts = the games themselves. We take these source texts and play using them, and that is the "Fandom by Source Text". So Earthdawn is a source text, and people might make specific pages for campaigns, for major events/settings/elements of the source canon and how players have used those, for tropes that have been raised, debates and wanks, etc. Or those might all be listed on the main page, if the fandom is small. - Activities = tournaments, cons, modding, etc. I don't think I would count campaigns here - I would subcat those to the game they're based on, much like characters or pairings are done now. Which means we'd need a template for that.
Of course, that's just me.
I think automatically defining all games as activities simply because one is being active in them is missing the point that writing, drawing, making vids, podficcing, and all of these other elements are also activities. A game's ruleset and/or structure is every bit as canon as a video or a book. The point is that we take all of these and play with them. Rather than being giving a single, clear narrative, we're given the opportunity to create our own narratives. I think that's what trips up folks who are more familiar with other canon types.
Re: Terms and Tropes, go for it! I find at least half the pages I create are of this type right now. Adding them creates a good structure for later editors.
Mostly what I think you need are some good templates. Sounds like you're already getting there.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
no subject
I think having separate categories is good, and I like the ones you've offered. We might want to make a category wishlist and put it somewhere for when there are actually pages to put in each category. Either way, RPG definitely needs to be sorted into LARP, Tabletop, Online and MMORPG at the bare minimum. In fact, I would go ahead and make those top-level subcats under "Games", rather than adding an RPG layer that would only add clicks for users.
I think of them as "fandom by source text," but there's some disagreement about that.
I'm not sure how to explain this the way I mean it, but sometimes how something looks to outsiders is not the bar one should use for deciding how to define a fandom. Fanlore is about inclusion, which means fangroups defining and explaining themselves, rather than having those explanations or definitions imposed from the outside, even by fans from other communities. So I would look seriously at
For me personally, the gaming divisions go something like this:
- Community = the gaming community at large, probably divided into online and in-person and some other finer distinctions depending on how you want to slice it.
- Canon Types = types of games, with many having subdivisions (flash games, RPGs, card games, and board games would all have obvious subcats).
- Source Texts = the games themselves. We take these source texts and play using them, and that is the "Fandom by Source Text". So Earthdawn is a source text, and people might make specific pages for campaigns, for major events/settings/elements of the source canon and how players have used those, for tropes that have been raised, debates and wanks, etc. Or those might all be listed on the main page, if the fandom is small.
- Activities = tournaments, cons, modding, etc. I don't think I would count campaigns here - I would subcat those to the game they're based on, much like characters or pairings are done now. Which means we'd need a template for that.
Of course, that's just me.
I think automatically defining all games as activities simply because one is being active in them is missing the point that writing, drawing, making vids, podficcing, and all of these other elements are also activities. A game's ruleset and/or structure is every bit as canon as a video or a book. The point is that we take all of these and play with them. Rather than being giving a single, clear narrative, we're given the opportunity to create our own narratives. I think that's what trips up folks who are more familiar with other canon types.
Re: Terms and Tropes, go for it! I find at least half the pages I create are of this type right now. Adding them creates a good structure for later editors.
Mostly what I think you need are some good templates. Sounds like you're already getting there.