Talk:Tales from the Loop

Cargo cult science fiction
Calling this science fiction is a false claim since it is lacking the science part. People wearing lab coats is not science, it's just cargo cult. On the opposite, there is a lot of magical thinking akin to fairy tales. Once again, Wikipedia proofs to be a brainless advertising platform by naively citing the press release. -- 2003:E5:1712:8A4C:5D0D:CBBA:75FC:FCDF (talk) 09:15, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * You are certainly welcome to edit and cite reliable sources that support your position.-- Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 14:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * More generally, Wikipedia says what its sources say. As long as our consensus is that reputable sources characterize Tales... as science fiction, our article will characterize Tales... as science fiction. Concluding the claim is false based on personal opinion is original research and will be rejected. CapnZapp (talk) 13:32, 14 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Time travel, identity transfer, time stasis... HOW is this not science fiction exactly??? Lee M (talk) 18:21, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The concepts exist in sci-fi, but as mentioned above, there is no science in this TV show. It's all unexplainable magic. Rlw (Talk) 11:17, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia reports what our sources say. In other words, the fact we say it's science fiction isn't because one of us has decided it's science and not magic; it's because that's how the show is presented in reputable media. If you can find such a source claiming the show isn't sci fi at all (but magic), feel free to edit it in. CapnZapp (talk) 14:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

As a lifelong science fiction fan, I can tell you that a great deal of science fiction, probably much more than half, wouldn't qualify as science fiction under your definition-- which is YOUR definition only. If you have near future interplanetary adventures, you can have science, and try to make it fairly realistic, or very realistic, as in The Martian or The Expanse-- but there are concepts in The Expanse such as teleportation to other solar systems that might as well be magic. Consider Star Trek. If you don't think that's science fiction, you're the only one, but it has matter transmission (transporters), faster than light drives with no explanation how they work, new kinds of radiation every week to explain anything you want, LOTS of time travel, rayguns (called phasers) and all sorts of things that might just as well be magic. ANY time you have time travel, there's no scientific basis for it. I suppose this show could have been done with magicians or evil gods powering the time travel, instead of scientific discoveries, aliens or whatever science fiction concepts are used here, and then it wouldn't be science fiction; it would be fantasy. Lord of the Rings could be rewritten as science fiction, with Sauron as a powerful alien. There is no clear boundary between science fiction and fantasy. Get over it.Wood Monkey 03:57, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Let me just take this opportunity to ask everybody to read up on Wikipedia's policies. If we reach a consensus our sources call this show "Cargo cult science fiction" (whatever that is), we would use that term. But since they don't, we don't. Our opinions as editors does not matter - what our sources say does. CapnZapp (talk) 08:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Mercer, Ohio
All sources talk about the "fictitious small town of Mercer, Ohio" (with variations). The real Mercer, Ohio is an "unincorporated community" and a quick Google Maps Street View confirms - this is much smaller than a town. A crossroads really.

Unless you can find a source confirming there's more to this than the show simply using a name, let's stick to what our sources say. CapnZapp (talk) 08:46, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * To clarify, this comment was in response to the linking (and unlinking) of Mercer to the existing location. I argued there is no value in this, since there is no relation between the two other than a shared name. (If you want to argue the show writers placed their Loop facility on the map near the real Mercer and imagined it considerably growing as a result, you're welcome to find reliable sources confirming this as fact). CapnZapp (talk) 08:45, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Article move
Tales from the Loop (role-playing game) from 2017 is definitely the main article. It received a lot of promotion at the time and praise for the art. It's like The Expanse (novel series) from 2011 has a spin-off television series in 2015 (even if the books were derived from a homebrew RPG). It's like The Lord of the Rings from 1954 has later spin-off films (and radio and stuff). Tales from the Loop is primarily a RPG from 2017. There is a spin-off television series in 2020 but that isn't the main flagship flying under the banner of Tales from the Loop and it shouldn't be the default landing page. The RPG should be default and should disambiguate to this page. See Stretch Goal #17 at the Kickstarter link. This is the book and system provided by Stålenhag. It's inspirational, no doubt, but an homage by Halpern isn't the main event. I don't believe it should trump the art book and RPG article for the right to have the "Tales for the Loop" main article. 110.175.120.214 (talk) 04:01, 8 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I fully agree with this, this should be the "Do you mean?" page, not the main page. 85.132.195.151 (talk) 14:51, 22 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Please read up on WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The quality of being the "first" or "default" instance of some artistic expression isn't particularly relevant for determining a primary topic. That the tv show is presented as the primary topic is likely because of the usage aspect: television is much much bigger than art books or tabletop role-playing games. There likely won't be more seasons of the show, so the "long-term significance" aspect probably won't matter. However. While I think a reader is more likely to be searching for the Amazon series than any other meaning of the term, I can't say with confidence it is much more likely than any other single topic, or more likely than all the other topics combined. Please note that what all this amounts to is the possibility of placing the disambiguation page at this location = having no primary topic. I don't see any other topic as a credible primary candidate. CapnZapp (talk) 23:24, 22 February 2023 (UTC)