Talk:Fictional technology

message: IS the WMD link on this page a joke (as in, a reference to Iraq's WMD being fictional), or is it a serious link?
perfectblue 12:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: WMD

message: I think there are 6 basic types of fictional technologies, but I would like peoples opinions, and possible referance materals. The types are as follows to me:
General technology (advanced generally used technology)
Secret technology (Technology developed in secret)
Alien technology (Technology alien to the culture to who it is introduced.)
Mad Science (See Mad scientist)
Alchemy (Considers magic and science to be two parts of the one force)
Magitech/Technomagic (Uses magic and technology together, but as seperate forces)
Corrupt one 02:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The concept appears prominently in Final Fantasy VI, Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura, and GURPS Technomancer, among other sources. I also suggest looking at the pen-and-paper RPG World Tree; better links than the Wikipedia article include , , and . This game is a setting with such ubiquitous magic that it is the world's technology. -Kris Schnee 21:51, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TYPES of fictional technology 

message: I am interested in what is sometimes called Magitech or technomagic. Magitech is technology that uses magic, and technomagic is magic that is based on technology. I am interested in getting material about this. Corrupt one 02:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The concept appears prominently in Final Fantasy VI, Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura, and GURPS Technomancer, among other sources. I also suggest looking at the pen-and-paper RPG World Tree; better links than the Wikipedia article include , , and . This game is a setting with such ubiquitous magic that it is the world's technology. -Kris Schnee 21:51, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Magitech and Technomagic

message: This may be entirely OR. Needs sources. --Lendorien 15:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced

message: While I am not impressed with the current state of this article, and the question arises if this in the end wants to be a prose article or list article, I think it is a notable subject. Both Technology in science fiction and Technology in fiction link here. The latter might actually be the best, because broadest, title. Including those terms, we get secondary sources like the corresponding article in the Science Fiction Encyclopedia.  Daranios (talk) 16:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Daranios Hmmm, given the source you found and redirects, this might be rescuable, but also with WP:TNT also applying. Ping User:TompaDompa, in case they'd like to take a stab at rewriting this first. Or creating a new article where we could redirect it. Note that "Technology in science fiction" is not exactly the same scope as "ficional technology", and it's arguable sources we find will be about Technology in science fiction, not fictional technology, so tentatively I could see a new article created at that other title and this being redirected there (arguably with nothing to salvage except categories/see also links). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:13, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: "Fictional technology" is a potentially extremely broad topic (depending on precisely how it is defined), almost certainly too broad for a list. I also think it's probably too broad for a useful prose article to be written, since it would most likely end up being completely scattershot. Technology in science fiction (as opposed to technologies in science fiction) is a much more narrow topic that a decent article could probably be written about (additional sources to look into besides the SFE entry include the "Technology" entry in The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy and the "Technology" entry in Science Fact and Science Fiction: An Encyclopedia). I'll note that Technology in science fiction was deleted back in April, see WP:Articles for deletion/Technology in science fiction. TompaDompa (talk) 04:14, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It was likely a TNT case like the mess here. That said, I think one of us could stub something at that location in 5-10m. After we do so, I would boldly redirect this entry there, unless User:Daranios would like a formal AfD? (Note, I say after, since otherwise we don't have a soft delete redirect target...). PS. For now, I've stubbed an entry about SFaSF since it's a notable work :P Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:26, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That's great. I've had creating an article for Science Fact and Science Fiction: An Encyclopedia on my to-do list for some time, but never got round to it. I have two or three more sources I might expand it with if/when I find time. For now, I've linked to it from a bunch of pages to WP:Build the web and added the sources I found to a "Further reading" section. TompaDompa (talk) 17:37, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Daranios @TompaDompa Here we go, Technology in science fiction is now a stub. Plenty of scope for expansion with the three sources listed. Can we now redirect the entry here there, or do we need a formal AFD for that? (also, ping User:Jclemens with whom I was recently talking about redirects and stuff) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:51, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never objected to appropriate deletion of content or redirection--regular editors can always retrieve anything useful or upgradable from the article history. Jclemens (talk) 06:13, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's fine with me. Even if not easily found, as  said the history is preserved in case someone sees a way use it, and the See also section helps to navigate to the most important related concepts. Thanks for creating the new article! Daranios (talk) 15:01, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok - article redirected. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:20, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability