Talk:Geek canon

message: I've added some descriptions to FPS gaming items on the list.  Anything on the list should be describing why such-and-such should/would be considered canon, so readers can get a feel for what makes something canon.  It would be nice to get examples that describe the various reasons something can be considered, so we don't just repeat the same reasons for every item.
For example, I stated in one of my descriptions that being the first in a genre or causing a mod community to spring up were causes for a game to be considered canon, but this could be factored out to the main discussion.
I think the main discussion could be rewritten, as it rambles on a bit.
—Daelin, 2004–10–16, 09:26 EDT
:I've tightened up the language a bit, and did some general clean-up.  I might be tempted to place this on a list of VfD articles -- I really don't see what purpose it serves as is, but I will let others make that call. - Scooter 05:16, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Descriptions for examples 

message: I did a somewhat substantial rewrite, although there's still more work needed.  Some commentary on the reasoning behind it:
* The article weirdly undercut itself early on.  The fact that geek culture is (allegedly) anti-authoritarian does not change a whit about whether a factual list of commonly-referenced artistic works can be compiled.  It merely makes it difficult for there to be one all-knowing granter of that list, or for a list to be easily acknowledged as correct.  So I slimmed up the self-doubting comments to a disclaimer at the beginning.  Hopefully that will prove acceptable.
** That said, after saying that the article is probably hopelessly subjective (which doesn't have to be true), it proceeds to make some very bold claims, like "The best description of what a "real world" work environment is "The Soul Of A New Machine" by Tracy Kidder."  Let's be careful with that unless it's something truly accepted.
* The word "articles," while correct, might introduce a bit of confusion between Wikipedia-articles and articles-articles.  So I tried to use "works" as in "creative works" instead.
* As for specific deletions, I see this not as a "neat underappreciated gems" article that mentions great art works that have been overlooked; these lists are really nice, mind, but extraordinarily hard to do objectively.  Saying something is good authoritatively is hard; but saying something is important and influential is a little easier.
** I removed Star Trek from the movie list because the first one wasn't exactly well-received, and it's already mentioned in television (which was probably more influential).  It also seemed a bit clunky to add "parts of the Star Trek movie series" in the middle of the list, though that would be accurate.
** Azumanga Daioh is surely a good show, but it hasn't achieved anywhere near the level of cultural saturation that Cowboy Bebop or Evangelion have.
** I owned an Amiga myself, but I think that's a standard subculture, hardly Geek canon.  Geeks are more than just computer-buffs, and Amiga-buffs were a subset of a subset.  If we do include it, it should probably go in some computing section, not quite "gadgets" (which would be more like ).
** A possible deletion for later: Does The Bard's Tale II really count?  I'm out of my league on some of the early computer gaming parts, but I don't recall the Bard's Tale really being mentioned in the same league as classics like Civilization.  The fact that the sequel is used seems even more suspicious...  but maybe I'm just totally off.  For all the self-congratulation about being in the present (which is less shocking when you consider that this subculture is basically only ~50 years old), the current list seems somewhat slanted towards 1975-1985.
** Same with Alan Lee.  I've never heard of him, and don't recall what little art there was to the versions of LOTR I read to be anything particularly special...  but maybe I read a different edition.  I'll assume that I'm just wrong on this count, but just registering this in case others who know better also think that Mr. Lee is more of a side figure.
* I'm not entirely certain about the random FPS interlude within gaming.  As part of the current whole, I'd say it's out of place with the level of detail, but it's possible that the article will grow in other places to make it seem not out of place.
* Anything else to go in the RPG section that would be universally accepted?  Shadowrun, despite being somewhat niche, can stay since it massively rips of Neuromancer which we already have listed as an important inspiration.  I was trying to come up with an appropriate "companion" to go with it for an "and" block between two other competitors to D&D, but the market thins a bit.  Call of Cthulu?  Mage: the Ascension?  Nothing else seemed to have both the popularity and cred required to go in a canon article, but maybe I'm forgetting something or selling it short. SnowFire 19:19, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some Revisions. 

message: Frankly, this whole subsection is full of BS. It says that sites like Google, YouTube, and Myspace used to be popular with geeks, but that geeks now avoid them because they are too mainstream. As far as I know, Geeks have hated Myspace since day one (I know I hated it long before it was mainstream) and I know for a fact that many geeks frequent youtube and Google. In matter of fact among many geeks, Google is considered the corporation of geekdom--one to be lauded, not scorned. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.168.96.230 (talk) 06:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geek Canon on the internet? 

message: From NeonMerlin: 
:Lack of references, or even alleged lack of verifiability, is not sufficient grounds for deleting an article without a vote.
Mm.  I didn't delete it, obviously; I redirected it, and nicely put a reminder over at Talk:Geek.  If you want to make an effort to source this article, then great, but basically none of the current sources are any good (the only one on point is from Mr. Konzack above, and it's awful.).  Ideally we want sources that don't just praise an item, but rather confirm that it's strongly referenced in a geek subculture.  If these sources don't come along soon, I unfortunately will nom it for AfD, and I don't think it'll survive if the comments above are any indication. SnowFire 00:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable sources.