Talk:List of stock characters in science fiction
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Added The Golem, The Robot Clone, and The God-like Alien
I don't know what these character types would be called in Sci-Fi literary or film circles. I'm not even sure if they're recognized as "official" character types, or what the criteria would be for that. I just know that I looked at the article, and saw a list of obvious sci-fi clichès, and a few commen archetypes felt like they were "missing," so I added them.
I tried very hard to follow the examples already on this page. I only cited what I felt were common sci-fi archetypes, and I tried to describe each character type as it relates to the other characters and to the setting. I cited a few examples of each type from popular works, including TV, movies, and books.
I tried very hard to approach it from a literary point of view, even though I am not formally trained in that field. I actually first surfed to this page while researching Stock Characters in order to better understand the process of creating fiction, so my main goal was to make the article more informative from that perspective.
Since this was my first edit, I figure there's a 90% chance I'll log in tomorrow and find my changes deleted, so I'm taking it one step at a time. If the community seems to find my contributions helpful, non-biased, and relevant, I'll add more later as I think of them.
Thanks for your indulgence.
WarpZone 04:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Update: Whoops, never mind!
It looks like the Horror Stock Character List is up for deletion due to "original research." I guess pretty soon all the lsits will be culled, too, including this one. Glad I didn't work too hard on this.
The lists of various Character Types were actually very interesting and helpful to me. But I suppose an encyclopedia is not the right place to go to for inspiration, hear-say, or the latest trends. I should probably chalk this up as an unexpected bonus inspiration where there wasn't supposed to be any, and stick to Google in the future when I'm digging for other peoples' interpretations of culture. I certianly shouldn't have bothered tossing my own interpretations onto the pile. Cuz I realize now that the pile is on a conveyor belt, and the converyor belt leads directly to the incinerator.
But, I mean... if they kill all the lists of Character Types, won't that make the article on Character Types largely unhelpful? To a person who wants or needs to learn about existing Character Types, I mean? Wouldn't that be kinda like an article about birds, only all the links to articles about different types of birds have been removed?
Oh well, it's out of my hands now. Sorry for bothering you guys. WarpZone 07:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, while I found this list very useful these characters need to have been referenced in some source as being stock characters in order to be a legit article. I was surprised its still here, so I wanted to quickly say thanks to the contributors before it goes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.74.71.51 (talk) 17:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Whatever Happened to how this page use to look like
This page was better back when it actually described a few of the types. Not to mention Amoral Scientist, Lame Amoral Scientist & Heroic Scientist were all merged into one Scientist stock character on this page when they are different stock characters with different character traits & I'm betting the Scientist link goes to the real life scientists which will tell you very little about fictional scientists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.177.70.28 (talk) 11:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- The article was improved at AFD - see above. Since this is a list it should be just that. Discussion of each character type would be best done at the individual articles. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey Sorry for not responding for so long but I've tried some of the links & so far only the Redshirt one leads to anything to do with fiction, the charcter types aren't discussed at most of the links because they don't focus on fiction. Trust me the old look was better.