Split "Harem Genre" from : Harem Genre

I switched the thread to Harem Genre. We should have done that ages ago.

Okay, crowner time. I created a multi-proposition crowner here. Feel free to add or edit options (especially the "Leave as is" option).

Bump for more votes.

Well, the crowner's been stable for a while, albeit at only 25 votes. Looks like the "split in three" option wins.

Again though, we need a litmus test to differentiate between "work with harem elements" and "Harem Genre." Any thoughts on the matter?

If the harem's OP focuses more on the girls that the other element it would be this? Hell I don't know, it's going to be a complicated set of criteria for this...

edited 19th Jul '11 10:53:59 AM by Raso

Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!

Consensus seems to be to split into three categories.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick

I'd like to add a few things.

• Gay harem. (Kyou Kara Maou)
• Lesbian harem.
• Bisexual harem.
• Reverse harem. (Ouran Highschool Host Club, Fruits Basket, Angelique, Perfect Girl Revolution).

Also in harem character types, male moe types need to be added.

I'm not sure that we need an entire subsection dedicated to subversion and deconstruction.

I don't think those are really distinct enough to merit their own divisions. It's just a variation on a regular harem, not a completely different type of story.

Reaction Image Repository

Why do we really need a section for the subversions again? I mean, the example on the crowner of The World God Only Knows is playing with the concept and also a straight example of it. I think earlier in the thread I said we should split the page into harem elements and harem series with harem series soft split to include the subversions and playing with examples. That still seems like the best course of action to me.

These were all going to be soft splits. All the examples are staying on the same page, just in different categories. Of course, if someone thinks a hard split is a good idea, they can pitch it, but I think that its overkill.

I don't think they all are harem genre though. One and three, yes. Two, no. The example given there is Code Geass, which does have some harem elements to it, but is not really a member of the genre. Nor would Tsukihime or something like that count, though it contains elements of it.

That's the reason this whole thing came up, actually. People were putting Code Geass (and a few other similar ones) on the Harem Genre page, and we decided to talk it over instead of starting an edit war. I don't think it should be here, but making a separate section for "Light harem elements" struck me as a good compromise.

Yeah. My memory of the previous discussion is kind of vague even though I took part in it. Never mind, actually. If the page becomes too long or something like that we can maybe do a hard split thing. Anyway, three way soft split wins, though come to think of it I now think if the page is being soft split instead of hard split the subversions still don't need their own section. Do we want to bother discussing that or just go on ahead with the current plan?

Bump, what's going on with this right now?

SPATULA, Supporters of Page Altering To Urgently Lead to Amelioration (supports not going through TRS for tweaks and minor improvements.)

Bump...

"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart

We're still trying to find a good litmus test for differentiating "Harem Series" from "Harem Elements." Mine was "If you take out the harem and the plot remains mostly unchanged, its just Harem Elements," but that didn't get much support.

*Looks at crowner...*

Then go by whether or not the series officially identifies itself as a Harem Series. o.o

edited 28th Dec '11 8:28:11 AM by HiddenFacedMatt

"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart

Bump...

"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart

Bumping again, because this thread seems to keep slipping behind...

"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart

Got a holler asking for help moving this one along.

On the face of it, the crowner winner is a lot of work for very little gain. 568 wicks — 329 with the correct current title, 239 messed-up wicks using alt-titles when alt-titles are just to aid searching. Changing all of those to make the distinction that some shows use the genre framework more and some less seems like a significant waste of effort. Noting subversions and deconstructions is a per-example thing, not a whole trope unto itself.

How about we just improve the existing text by noting these genre features, soft-split the examples into major-focus vs the rest, and fix up all those erroneous wicks?

edited 1st Jan '12 7:35:50 PM by Camacan

It seems rather wrong to ignore the crowner's decision.

And I actually think that litmus-test proposal sounds about fine to me. Harem series: "Where the presence of a harem provides the majority of the plot and drama, and is essentially the point of the series", Harem elements: "When the main character of a given work has a harem, of four or more characters vying for their attention and it's a major plot element in the story."

edited 1st Jan '12 7:43:56 PM by NoirGrimoir

SPATULA, Supporters of Page Altering To Urgently Lead to Amelioration (supports not going through TRS for tweaks and minor improvements.)

The original idea was a soft split, which means only the ones on the page would have to be sorted.

Bump. What's the final verdict?

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

Made a sandbox and sorted all the works I knew into the appropriate categories. Let's see if we can all agree on where everything goes. If we can't, then I guess we'll have to go back to the drawing board.

Bump.

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.