Talk:Science fiction

Structure of the Article

The Template:Science fiction is very different from the article. What should we do? Outline Sub genres Cultures - miscellaneous - region - awards --Multimedia -- cinematic -- literary art audio Media - literature - stage - film - Television Themes -Applied -Formal -Life -Physical -social Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 14:13, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

I don't see a problem. The purpose of the template is to provide links to articles readers might be interested in. The purpose of the article is to provide a brief summary of science fiction in a way that is readable for the average reader. That it also provides links is secondary.PopSci (talk) 18:36, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

I'd like to try moving "Characteristics" below "History" since it is now expanded and seems to be more related to the "Influence" section which it would then lead into. I think it's more common in WP articles to first define a topic, then give the history, then discuss its influence. Making the change now, feel free to revert if you liked it better before.PopSci (talk) 16:03, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Classification section

I'm concerned that this section is basically rife for WP:FANCRUFT - it's basically just a list of authors who the editors think belong in that category at this point and there's no citations. I mean it's common knowledge that Isaac Asimov is considered a hard SF author, but there's got to be a WP:RS somewhere, right? I'm very tempted to restructure this to focus more on the social and cultural queues that led to the subgenre split between "hard" and "soft" and do away with the lists altogether. But in case this is retreading old ground I thought it prudent to check here first. Simonm223 (talk) 19:45, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I made my change. It's now much more a discussion of the paradigmatic classification and how views of it have shifted, referencing notable authors. Simonm223 (talk) 16:50, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

I like what you did. I will try another move and make it part of the "Science fiction studies" section, since it seems to be at least related to that.PopSci (talk) 15:33, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

I also moved the "Elements" list. Part of the reason to have lists at the end of the article is because they tend to send readers off to other articles.PopSci (talk) 16:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)\

Science fiction is where the science is fictional for the time it was written. The problems are when other genres, action, drama, horror, adventure, film noir, etc. overlay the story. The science fiction is usually a just a frame for the story. "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" Is science fiction/adventure even though submarines are now real. "Apollo 18" is not science fiction because the science is real at the time of the making. It's horror, maybe science/horror, same as anything else in a real context. "Frankenstein" is science fiction/horror. "Brazil" isn't science fiction even though the look is science fictionish. 98.164.78.239 (talk) 10:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Video Game section

What is this trying to accomplish? The list is hardly exhaustive and is unlikely to be representative of any accepted list of genre defining games. This seems like a good place for a link to another article exploring this topic in more depth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.176.196.206 (talk) 12:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

It could be spun off as a new article List of science fiction video games and then that title added to the see also list.73.170.223.31 (talk) 23:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

A complete list would be hundreds of games.PopSci (talk) 19:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Delete the Definition section

i think we need purge out of the article most of the definition debate to Definitions_of_science_fiction. Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 15:23, 14 January 2020 (UTC) Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 15:30, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

I moved the most difficult paragraph. I hope that helps.SpecInterest (talk) 09:27, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay. I just looked at the other genres. I have changed the section name to delete the definition. The content is too deep for an initial casual reader Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 13:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)