![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was nominated for merging with Sword and sorcery on 29 July 2023. The result of the discussion ( permanent link) was Merge. |
![]() | The contents of the Heroic fantasy page were merged into Sword and sorcery on 15 August 2023 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Sorry about the no-ID on adding the quotations section; I can't seem to stay logged in for more than a few minutes at a time tonight, and didn't notice that I had been logged off. — B.Bryant 03:37, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
How does the "heroic fantasy" described here differ from "high fantasy" or "sword-and-sorcery" sufficient to merit a separate entry? The authors listed here are also listed under those genres. Goldfritha 00:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
If you merge the two articles then the Heroic Fantasy article needs to be greatly revised as it is integrated into the S&S sorcery entry. I would not classify the Lord of the Rings the works of CS Lewis as Sword and Sorcery at all. They might have influenced the genre but go above and beyond especially in works other than those whose setting was Middle Earth or Narnia. If you merge the two articles, I would not want to see the Lord of the Rings or CS Lewis relegated to a sub-genre. I could accept that the genre of Sword and Sorcery was greatly influenced by either author but there should be a distinction in the article because I would make the argument that both the Lord of the Rings and Narnia (the works that arguably could be labeled as S&S) transcend and greatly differ from the genre they influenced. So if you do merge the articles I feel that certain authors should be removed from the classification if they do not fit the sword and sorcery classification or their role and relevance of the works to the genre even though they arguably do not fit into the genre. Blueskelton 10:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Blueskelton
shouldnt this be tagged first as being fulil of POV and questionable contend? not just pov btw, overstated opinion with attempt at persuation.-- Lygophile 14:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Fantasy was long distinguishable from mythological tales long before LOR. In fact, it was distinguishable from them in the medieval romances, when it was not exactly fantasy. Goldfritha 19:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Six years later. Today I read the main section of this discussion ( #(Merge?) as I rearranged it. I agree with Chris Thornett and Goldfritha that it is reasonable to use The Encyclopedia of Fantasy by John Clute and John Grant (1999) as a crucial source for our coverage of fantasy. And The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction by Clute and Peter Nicholls (1993; third edition online 2011) on some points.
Regarding speculative fiction genres and subgenres, we have dozens of "main" articles and perhaps several merges that are worth some consideration. This hour I begin modestly by adding some articles to WP Novels fantasy task force. -- P64 ( talk) 21:23, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Another five years have gone by, with no progress on this discussion. Perhaps someone with more knowledge of current Wikipedia practices and codes than I should just Be Bold. At the very least, Heroic fantasy should be merged with Sword and sorcery, as the opening quote on this article equates the two explicitly. Whateley23 ( talk) 03:01, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
Seen as though they are directly equated is there even a requirement for this article in the first place? If their the same thing merging them will just inflate the sword and sorcery article with the exact same information. Perhaps deleting this article and simply proposing it as an alternate name on the sword and sorcery article? AnyOwl ( talk) 15:29, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
The lead section is making major negative generalizations about this genre. DemonDays64 ( talk) 01:59, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Such a story combines [sic] the color and dash of the historical costume romance with the atavistic supernatural thrills of the weird, occult, or ghost story.
This doesn't seem to be an error? Usually "sic" follows an obvious error in grammar that was in the original, thus quoting it while acknowledging the error as an error. But "Such a story combines the aspects of the historical romance with the aspects of the ghost story" seems to me to be a perfectly grammatical construction, and the expansion doesn't seem to introduce any problems, certainly not with the word "combines"; what am I missing? Kilyle ( talk) 19:26, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
"Unlike dark fiction, it provides a setting in which 'all men are strong, all women beautiful, all life adventurous, and all problems simple'." This quote is very centric towards men, and it's misogynistic; women are not ornaments and any woman's appearance does not exist to serve men. if you get what i mean. I strongly suggest that it be changed 2600:4040:A034:A300:1119:F3A8:6BC9:D2FC ( talk) 01:19, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was nominated for merging with Sword and sorcery on 29 July 2023. The result of the discussion ( permanent link) was Merge. |
![]() | The contents of the Heroic fantasy page were merged into Sword and sorcery on 15 August 2023 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Sorry about the no-ID on adding the quotations section; I can't seem to stay logged in for more than a few minutes at a time tonight, and didn't notice that I had been logged off. — B.Bryant 03:37, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
How does the "heroic fantasy" described here differ from "high fantasy" or "sword-and-sorcery" sufficient to merit a separate entry? The authors listed here are also listed under those genres. Goldfritha 00:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
If you merge the two articles then the Heroic Fantasy article needs to be greatly revised as it is integrated into the S&S sorcery entry. I would not classify the Lord of the Rings the works of CS Lewis as Sword and Sorcery at all. They might have influenced the genre but go above and beyond especially in works other than those whose setting was Middle Earth or Narnia. If you merge the two articles, I would not want to see the Lord of the Rings or CS Lewis relegated to a sub-genre. I could accept that the genre of Sword and Sorcery was greatly influenced by either author but there should be a distinction in the article because I would make the argument that both the Lord of the Rings and Narnia (the works that arguably could be labeled as S&S) transcend and greatly differ from the genre they influenced. So if you do merge the articles I feel that certain authors should be removed from the classification if they do not fit the sword and sorcery classification or their role and relevance of the works to the genre even though they arguably do not fit into the genre. Blueskelton 10:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Blueskelton
shouldnt this be tagged first as being fulil of POV and questionable contend? not just pov btw, overstated opinion with attempt at persuation.-- Lygophile 14:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Fantasy was long distinguishable from mythological tales long before LOR. In fact, it was distinguishable from them in the medieval romances, when it was not exactly fantasy. Goldfritha 19:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Six years later. Today I read the main section of this discussion ( #(Merge?) as I rearranged it. I agree with Chris Thornett and Goldfritha that it is reasonable to use The Encyclopedia of Fantasy by John Clute and John Grant (1999) as a crucial source for our coverage of fantasy. And The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction by Clute and Peter Nicholls (1993; third edition online 2011) on some points.
Regarding speculative fiction genres and subgenres, we have dozens of "main" articles and perhaps several merges that are worth some consideration. This hour I begin modestly by adding some articles to WP Novels fantasy task force. -- P64 ( talk) 21:23, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Another five years have gone by, with no progress on this discussion. Perhaps someone with more knowledge of current Wikipedia practices and codes than I should just Be Bold. At the very least, Heroic fantasy should be merged with Sword and sorcery, as the opening quote on this article equates the two explicitly. Whateley23 ( talk) 03:01, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
Seen as though they are directly equated is there even a requirement for this article in the first place? If their the same thing merging them will just inflate the sword and sorcery article with the exact same information. Perhaps deleting this article and simply proposing it as an alternate name on the sword and sorcery article? AnyOwl ( talk) 15:29, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
The lead section is making major negative generalizations about this genre. DemonDays64 ( talk) 01:59, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Such a story combines [sic] the color and dash of the historical costume romance with the atavistic supernatural thrills of the weird, occult, or ghost story.
This doesn't seem to be an error? Usually "sic" follows an obvious error in grammar that was in the original, thus quoting it while acknowledging the error as an error. But "Such a story combines the aspects of the historical romance with the aspects of the ghost story" seems to me to be a perfectly grammatical construction, and the expansion doesn't seem to introduce any problems, certainly not with the word "combines"; what am I missing? Kilyle ( talk) 19:26, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
"Unlike dark fiction, it provides a setting in which 'all men are strong, all women beautiful, all life adventurous, and all problems simple'." This quote is very centric towards men, and it's misogynistic; women are not ornaments and any woman's appearance does not exist to serve men. if you get what i mean. I strongly suggest that it be changed 2600:4040:A034:A300:1119:F3A8:6BC9:D2FC ( talk) 01:19, 1 December 2022 (UTC)