[WikiEN-l] Comic book articles and fancruft (was: Pattern copyvios involving...)

[MacGyverMagic/Mgm]

On 10/21/06, Earle Martin <wikipedia at downlode.org> wrote:
>
> > Also, the definition of "fancruft" is far less clear than the definition
> > of "libel." I'd want to see something solid and widely accepted for that
> > as well.
>
> Okay, then, I'd like to throw that one out to the list, but I'll start
> with: unnecessarily verbose, gushing and hyper-detailed recitation of
> trifling details about a fictional element, contributed with a
> reverence better reserved for factual information. (Or, in the terms
> that I prefer, the dull and witless prattling of socially-impaired
> nerds, but that's only my opinion, and not a recommendation for policy
> wording.)
>
>
> --
> Earle Martin


The thing is "unneccesarily verbose", "gushing", "trifling details" make the
whole term subjective. Where one finds even finds a mention of comic book
character verbose, not everyone will agree. You can't treat fancruft until
there's a proper objective definition of what it is.

I'll suggest you shouldn't go in more detail with a fictional character than
you'd go with the bio of an living person. When you mention "the dull and
witless prattling of socially-impaired
nerds" it's clear you already set a very high standard for fictional
content. And I don't see why the standard should be any higher than with
non-fictional stuff. It's just as much part of our daily lives.

Mgm