Move
edit@Clovermoss:, the recent move to Fantasy viking seems incorrect for English, as Viking is generally capitalized (wikt:Viking). Blockhaj (talk) 20:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sentence case is generally used for article titles, see WP:LOWERCASE. If you disagree that this should be the case in this particular instance, a move request would probably be a good idea. I'd say it's possible people might consider other possible titles as better alternatives (Vikings in fiction or Cultural depictions of vikings). Precedent for those sorts of titles can be found with Saturn in fiction and Cultural depictions of cats. Clovermossđ (talk) 20:24, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- I choose the title simply based on POLA looking at various search results. I'l do a move request. Blockhaj (talk) 20:28, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- I don't fault you for choosing the title you chose (the MOS can get a bit complicated and even I don't always understand the debates people have about it). Regardless of what we call it, I think an article on this subject is a good idea. Thank you for creating it. Clovermossđ (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- I choose the title simply based on POLA looking at various search results. I'l do a move request. Blockhaj (talk) 20:28, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Requested move 9 June 2024
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: reverted to previous title per objection to recent move, WP:RMUM. A new move request proposing a change to a lowercase title can be initiated if necessary. Dekimasuă! 22:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Fantasy viking â Fantasy Viking â Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. Blockhaj (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
See above. Blockhaj (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
POV discussion
editThere are a number of issues on this article that obliege me to question its neutrality. First and foremost, where exactly has the term "fantasy vikings" come from? I cannot find a source for this term in the article. Indeed, such a naming convention biases the reader against modern depictions of viking culture before they even read the first sentence by suggesting that everything covered in the article is "made up" (for lack of a better term).
A decent chunk of the article is properly sourced, but list of media that allegedly contains "fantasy" depictions is not. Franky, I'm not sure why or even if this needs to be a separate article from Vikings#In modern popular culture. -- JascaDucato (talk | contributions) 21:50, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- Fantasy Viking and Imaginary Vikings are not standardised terms, simply discriptive such for the lack of better. As mentioned in a previous discussion, the article name is up for debate, an example being Vikings in fiction, however, since the topic doesn't actually cover historical Vikings, instead a fantasy creation of its own, the name Fantasy Viking is imo the more proper name, as the name "Vikings in fiction" also entails historical Vikings set in fiction. The appropriate reddit choose the name Imaginary Vikings for their community, however, this combo is much less common in search results than "Fantasy Vikings".
- The media list can easily be sourced if needed.
- This should be a separate article from Vikings#In modern popular culture simply due to the subject. Fantasy Vikings are not the same thing as historical Vikings, it is its own fantasy trope and there is a lot to write about which isn't suited for the Viking article. In the same manner there should also be a fantasy Pirate article, fantasy Egyptians, lost civilisations in fiction etc etc.--Blockhaj (talk) 22:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- Firstly, before I respond I should advise you against removing the POV tag. It was placed for legitimate reasons and should not be removed simply because you disagree. That being said: the term "fantasy vikings" can be considered POV since it implies that anything arbitrarily listed in this article is fanciful and less than other forms of fiction. A more appropriate title would be Vikings in popular culture (currently a redirect, but could be split off into its own article) since there is no need to distinguish between romanticised, yet historical individuals, and completely fictional ones. Both fall under the same broad category of being fanciful.
- Regarding the list, any source would need to indicate that the depiction contianed therein is distinctly not historically accurate. The medium's existence in and of itself is not grounds for inclusion. Finally, for my part, I added the POV tag because I believe the article is written in such a way that it seeks to present the romanticised view of vikings disparagingly. -- JascaDucato (talk | contributions) 14:09, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- The tag was implemented incorrectly both times.
- Anyway, where in the article is it implied fantasy vikings is "less than other forms in fiction"?
- Vikings in popular culture is incorrect, as that implies these fantasy creations are the same as historical Vikings, which they are not. Historical Vikings are still portrayed in some popular culture, such as, for example, the movie the Northman. Even though it fills historical unknown gaps with speculative theories and arguably features some creative freedom (as all movies), it still aims at trying to portray historical Northmen. In comparison, Vikings the TV series, doesn't emphasize historical accuracy, instead going for artistic ideas and creative freedom, aka, fantasy. Even then, fantasy Vikings is not simply "unhistorical Vikings", instead having become a fantasy trope on its own and should be separated from historical Vikings. This is also not an isolated occurance, the same has happened with pirates, ninjas, barbarians, dwarfs, and a variety of other "mythical beings" from history. Blockhaj (talk) 15:44, 13 June 2024 (UTC)