Talk:Magic in fiction

Removal of magic as plot function

Though I do agree the orginal edition wasn't encyclopedic enough, I do believe that the section should still exist. The important effect magic has on the plots of many fantasies must be addressed. User: SwanofWar February 12, 2008

I agree. Magic allows plots to take routes they could not otherwise take. As long as we can find reliable, and verifiable referances to reasearch done into this, it should be there. After all, can you imagine a Forgotten Realms novel without magic? Corrupt one (talk) 00:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Removal of "magic" and replacement with "wizard"

There is no reason to take out the section with terminology refering to magic and replace it with one refering to wizards. If there shouldn't be two articles, they should be collapsed. If we keep two articles, the one about magic should be about magic, not wizards. Goldfritha 00:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

See my response at Wizard (fantasy) - jc37 03:24, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Your response is inadequate. Kindly make your case. Goldfritha 23:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I brought the matter to discussion page last time, and waited for a response, and you did not defend it that time. You should defend your change before you make it, and certainly when you make it. Goldfritha 22:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Your response appears intemperate. Kindly adjust your tone. An additional reminder: As I noted above, I responded at Wizard (fantasy), in an effort to keep the discussion unified. (As you know, since you responded there). I suggest that you look there for further discussion. - jc37 23:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Discworld

The section on Discworld probably should be completely overhauled -- or removed to the Discworld article. The level of detail is inappropriate and the elements that do apply to magic in fantasy in general ought to be rendered in more generic language, with other examples. Goldfritha 01:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, if no one wants it -- out it goes. Goldfritha 04:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Ars arcana

Appears to be just a snippet belonging in the terminology section here. Goldfritha 00:41, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Merging. Goldfritha 00:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Various genres

The part on alchemy should belong in the alchemy article, although I will admite that there can be a referance to alchemy in this area because they need to be comparead. Alchemy combines magic and basic science, and should be listed, but just briefly! Corrupt one (talk) 22:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Modern magics

Can we have a segment on modern uses of magic, like technomancy, which is magic applied to technology, and Magitech, which is technology that incorperates mages? Corrupt one (talk) 22:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

That should have its own article. Dark Lord Thomas Pie (talk) 16:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Article title

The title of this article seems unnecessarily confusing. Is there objection to moving it to Magic in fiction (or perhaps Magic in fantasy fiction)? Propaniac (talk) 16:43, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Witch already redirects to Witchcraft while Wizard, Sorcerer, Mage, Enchanter, and their female counterparts redirect to Magician (fantasy). Perhaps we should hold off on merging Magician (fantasy) with Magic in fiction. Rtkat3 (talk) 14:23, February 2 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Magic in fiction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121103164304/http://www.endicott-studio.com:80/rdrm/rrItalianF.html to http://www.endicott-studio.com/rdrm/rrItalianF.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:23, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Sourcechecked  —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Revisions

• Considering organizational structure to see what can be improved
• Copy-editing for grammar and spelling
• Working on style and sentence structure to make confusing sentences more understandable
• Working on fixing passive voice
• Eliminating general statements that are not true for every fiction author or contemporary fiction, making the text more inclusive of all contemporary fiction

Mindib (talk) 03:55, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Magic in fiction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170311175412/https://wikis.engrade.com/plottingashortstory to https://wikis.engrade.com/plottingashortstory

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

"Ars arcana" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Ars arcana and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 1#Ars arcana until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:28, 1 April 2022 (UTC)