Talk:Pastoral science fiction

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

noun != verb[edit]

"centred on the image of the ‘faber'" (from proto-Italian faβros, "to fashion" or "to fit")

I'm no expert on Proto-Italic but I do know some Latin, and faβros looks a lot like a noun rather than a verb. —Tamfang (talk) 10:34, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary gives this definition for "fabris": from "earlier *θaβros, from Proto-Indo-European *dʰh₂bʰ-ró-s, from *dʰh₂ebʰ- (“to fashion, fit”)." https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Italic/fa%CE%B2ros

OnBeyondZebrax • TALK 18:46, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I read that too. Nouns are often derived from verbs; that doesn't make them verbs. When an etymology says "X, from Y, from Z 'meaning'," I for one take it to mean that Y has the same meaning as X, not Z. —Tamfang (talk) 23:03, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is a good point. I will change the terms to nouns ("fashioning", "fitting"). I appreciate your greater knowledge of etymology. I realize I was misunderstanding the Wiktionary entry.OnBeyondZebrax • TALK 18:31, 29 November 2023 (UTC)@[reply]

Hate to cavil with good faith but I don't think that's an improvement over (craftsman, from a root meaning "to fashion" or "to fit"). We have a verb root and an agent noun derived (apparently already in PIE) from that verb; we have neither grounds nor need to infer a gerund between them. —Tamfang (talk) 05:10, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

@OnBeyondZebrax I've noticed you have been working on this for the last few months - kudos! This is an interesting topic that was somewhere on my to do list. That said, I'd like to provide you with some early feedback (as somone who has gotten several sf topic to Good Article status). Namely, I am a bit concerned that some content you are adding is unreferenced. This is bad, per WP:V and WP:OR. Whenever you add something, it should have a reference, otherwise you'll need to revisit your sources.

For example of problematic content I see here, consider Joan Slonczewski's A Door into Ocean is another example of feminist pastoral science fiction. It is set in the future, on the fictional planet of Shora, a moon covered by water. The inhabitants of this planet, known as Sharers, are all female and they use genetic engineering to control the ecology of their planet. They are peaceful beings who share resources and treat everyone equally. When they are being threatened by an outside power in an invasion, they resist nonviolently. This seems like pure original research at present and cannot be kept, unless you can find a source that says so. If not, I recommend submitting such content to SFE first, then to Wikipedia, once they publish it. Incidentally, I notice you have not yet used them at all: https://sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/pastoral I find it best to start with such overviews (from SFE and related sources, like various encyclopedias of sf such as The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy) and then enrich it with scholarly works and good journalism. And again, avoid unreferneced OR, it is just a waste of effort.

I'll also ping another experienced and active sf-topic writer, User:TompaDompa, in case you'd like a second opinion or more feedback. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:40, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]