Talk:Fan art

message: What about all the art based on works that are in the public domain, like the countless paintings, architecture and music based on the bible and other folklore? Technically it's also fan art. Aiselu (talk) 09:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fan Art based on Works in the Public Domain? 

message: Removed a half-dozen links. Anything for a single fandom is probably not notable. Honestly, I'd be surprised if half of what's left is notable.  –Aponar Kestrel (talk) 05:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linkspam 

message: This image is more of a parody, and not an example of fanart. I think that Image:The Simpsons Fan Art.jpg would be more appropriate, as it features slightly altered well-known characters, who are recognised easily but it is clearly seen that they are drawn in a different style.--Orthologist 13:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: Personally, I've never (ever) seen it referred to as "fan art"--just "fanart", so I'm pretty sure that's the more common term. 76.10.182.116 (talk) 21:46, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Hugo Award for Best Fan Artist is the best-known example; it is not for "Best Fanartist". "Fanart" is a more recent contraction. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:30, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fanart vs Fan art 

message: This article only discusses the legality of fan-art (and only then fairly briefly) in America. That leaves the question, what is the legal standpoint on fan art in other countries? For example I live in Britain and this article, such as it currently is, doesn't help me at all (but would require to be updated by someone with a basic knowledge of copyright law in various of other countries).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.177.217 (talk) 09:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other countries? 

message: Please don't link to an article in the project namespace. Regardless of your opinion on what images should be included, such links are not appropriate. Thanks! --Yaksar (let's chat) 05:17, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project Namespace 

message: "Some people in the art community believe that since fan art is based on someone else's original content, it doesn't deserve to be considered "art." Their definition of art entails that it must be an expression of the artist, and artwork that is derived from already-existing content cannot fulfill this." 
This section needs clarification & a reliable source. Who is the "art community?" Without context, it sounds like this is a position of art history experts, professional artists, and/or people who are otherwise prominent in the field, but it is based on a fanwiki citiation of a single Livejournal comment from a random user in a post about fridge magnets from 2003. 
I propose that this section be removed. 
Foxgloved (talk) 00:16, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:52, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:00, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: 1509 105.110.17.39 (talk) 16:19, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aymen