Talk:Fan (person)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hey, I added a section on the end of this article about sports fans and honestly don't understand how that was never originally included into this page's design. I am not familiar enough with this stuff to create new entries, and I think sports fan should be its own page ideally, with a smaller summarization of sports fans in this article with a link to the bigger one. However since I don't know how to create a new article, I simply typed up a lot on sports fans in the hopes that someone else would correct it by making it its own article and dumping the excess info in there. There's plenty more to be said about sports fans than what I put in there today too so feel free to tack on more sections once its in a new article too. --billny33 0:11, 29 January 2007

fans are scary —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.69.130.255 (talk • contribs) .

While I certainly don't like fangirls (due to a certain Yuu Yuu Hakusho character who had used them to help him humiliate Kuwabara, but the fangirls themselves are just as guilty about my disgust about it for their remark about Kuwabara's ability to get any girls to date him; Kuwabara has a point in his response to that, needless to say), you should post something more meaningful on this Talk Page next time around. Okay? --Juigi Kario (Charge! * My crusades) 20:37, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Redirect?

Shouldn't fanboi redirect to fanboy? and not this article? - Abscissa 13:14, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

It probably shouldn't be in at all. Since the basic definition of "fanboy" is "fan of something the commentor does not like." All the talk about social ineptitude seems to stem from that basic premise--since the speaker does not acknowledge the value of the fan's "darling", the speaker flatly reports that the fan is wasting his time, wasting his life, not social, etc. "How can he be social when he doesn't SKI like me?" Meanwhile the comic reader is whispering "Pathetic ski fanboy." It's an inherently invective term without any real delineation to it other than the speaker's personal tastes. 24.33.28.52 20:08, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Regardless of whether it should or should not be in, it's brilliant, and I vote for it staying.

[edit] Graphic Whore

Why is this section in this article? It doesn't fit in with the rest of the text and includes a link to a phantom entry graphics whore. I intend to remove it shortly if no-one can defend it's existance. Markb 07:41, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Good for you, Markb. Rick Norwood 21:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biased?

I don't really care but this article does seem a tad baised agaisnt Fangirls. I really don't care for them but the article should be a bit more balanced. For instance, where it says some fangirls claim to be in a relationship with anime characters maybe it should be added that it is some times said only in jest...

Just my 2 cents

Agreed. I think strictly speaking, the term 'fangirl' really just means a female fan. Negative connotations arise from stereotyping. There are quite a few sweeping statements in that paragraph about fangirls, like "fangirls tend to be more devoted to emotional and romantic aspects of their fandom, especially shipping" and "[the term] is most often used in a derogatory sense to describe a girl's obsession with something". --Lareine 19:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Also agreed! I'm a fangirl myself, and while I agree with the fact that fangirls are what the article defines the term as, I didn't like how it said that fangirls "often" disregard canon when writing fanfiction. I changed it to "sometimes" - Cool? In addition, maybe someone should add something about "fangirls" also being considered as JUST female fans by some people, or something along those lines. Definitely add the part about claims of relationships are sometimes in jest. --Teoka 00:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Based on my experience with fanfiction.net, "often" seems more accurate than "sometimes," though I'm not sure about fangirls elsewhere..
I too believe "often" is more apt a term, for many fanfictions I've come across are simply fictional romances that completely disregard a character's personality, or any event in the storyline. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.231.203.184 (talk) 22:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC).
Really I don't mind whether it is biased or not. I really don't think so. I am a girl and willingly admit to being a mild fangirl. The connotation fits. It is a crazy obsessive nature of about 99.999% of girls whether or not they care to admit it. While only the extreme fangirl really poses any threat, it doesnt seem extremely...I don't know, healthy. While this tendancy can be found in guys, it's just shown more often and in a more interesting manner in girls. In fact, I believe the definition is too toned down. That's just me. I think that you have to be able to laugh at your crazy quirks, this being one of them. If you really take offense to this, maybe you just need to step back and ask yourself if you can laugh at yourself. Sorry if you take that the wrong way. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.129.164.124 (talk) 07:41, 1 January 2007 (UTC).
I don't really mind. I'm a fangirl, but I didn't find myself exactly screaming at the computer as I read the article. It's pretty true. But maybe it could say, you know, not all fangirls are crazy... I am, but not all fangirls are I am sure. 80.43.72.100 21:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
I think someone should rewrite this. It makes it seem as if fanboys are on a higher level than fangirls. I myself am a Fullmetal Alchemist fangirl, but I focus more on scientific theories and symbolism in the series rather than relationships between characters. Not only that, but most fangirls I've spoken too aren't into yaoi or smut - romance is OK, as long as it's canon. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.196.220.6 (talk) 11:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Page title?

Why is this page at Fan (aficionado) rather than Fan (person) or something similar? Also, even if it's going to be aficianado, shouldn't the title include the accent marks? --tjstrf 23:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

"Aficionado" is not actually spelled with an accent mark. I will perform the move now. Peter O. (Talk) 05:26, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

i think that fangirls are described perfectly, as a fangirl myself I dont see anything wrong the post because it is all true and well that is not biased since it seems to have more objective statements rather thatn subjective

[edit] 2 paragraphs

Hiya I added two paragraphs on fandom, including comparing fans to religious worshippers and providing an explanation for what makes a program have lots of fans. Does this qualify as orginal research? - Be Bold!

Yes, it does; if there is no evidence backing this up, then it's an OR violation.--Orange Mike 17:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Origin of the word

The notion that "fan" is short for "fanatic" is given short shrift in this article. Actually, the theory has much to reccomend it.

Also possible: "Fan" (more commonly "fanny" nowadays)is historically speaking a dismissive anatomical term, at present meaning "butt" and yet more anciently it was a derogatory term for female genitals. Calling someone a fan was at one time like calling someone an asshole or a cunt -- it meant the person in question was a jerk, a fool, a mindless follower. Tom129.93.17.139 22:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

"Fanny" in the British sense was seldom, if ever, shortened to "fan"; and I've never encountered it used as a synonym for a prat or wanker, as you seem to be implying. --Orange Mike 13:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

"Fan" is short for "fanatic" [1] - I have no idea why this article is here instead of at Fanatic. Can anybody provide a good reason? If not, I think a move is in order. Waggers 11:22, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Because (while I tend to agree with the theory) it's not all that settled as an etymology; and the two terms have entirely different histories nowadays. --Orange Mike 13:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This "fanboy" and "fangirl" nonsense

I don't even know anybody over the age of 17 who uses these words, let alone anyone who would consider them appropriate discussion topics in an encyclopaedia. Barely notable to be the first "type" of fan discussed either - At least merge these two sections.

So you consider youth culture to be an unacceptable subject for an encyclopedia? Algabal 03:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
To that extend? Do you consider that acceptable? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.10.215.209 (talk) 11:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Japanese Pop Culture Fangirls

The entire Japanese Pop Culture Fangirls section, but especially the second, sounds like someone's personal vendetta. No citations, original research, and completely embarrassing besides. I'm not sure it's even possible to provide citations for broad claims like these--fans are by no means a unified group. I'm new to Wikipedia, so I'm not entirely sure what to do about this, but honestly I'd like to just delete that paragraph until someone can write a useful replacement? Peachke 18:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, do you know any anime/manga fangirls personally? That section of the article may sound unfair but it is quite accurate. If you want to edit it and try to change what you think sounds like opinion into cold fact be my guest. 144.137.217.117 (talk) 09:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
It was still unsourced and violated our restrictions on original research, verifiability, reliable sources, etc. I've removed it. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:47, 18 February 2008 (UTC) (has an otaku fangirl in his home)