General term, specific trope: Crossover

Our page for Crossover is, as it turns out, a Sub-Trope of what the existing term "Crossover" actually means. Apparently it only includes crossovers between works that are already in the same universe. So, for example, none of the examples on Intercontinuity Crossover are Crossovers. This is a problem.

A cursory glance at wicks shows a predictably high rate of misuse.

If Intercontinuity Crossover is our standard, then the correct term for this trope would be Intracontinuity Crossover (a crossover within the same continuity).

Heck, the description even limits itself to "shows in the same universe"! Delete all the non-TV examples, stat! ;)

Seriously, though, using this definition can get a bit tricky. For example, there are, uh, crossovers between the Marvel and DC universes that assume that they have always co-existed in the same universe. Technically, those belongs under (just plain) Crossover, but that doesn't seem right, does it?

Also, I see that "crossover" was originally defined solely as stories within the same universe (or at least the description claims this). I think that we're way past that as a culture now, and while we should acknowledge the term's origins, we should run with the commonly accepted definition.

Agreed. "Crossover" in the general sense is X Meets Y where X and Y are separate works.

The reason for the page being as it is is because all the various types are recorded and notified as such on the Crossover Index and Crossover doesn't keep any of the subtropes and so the non-"classic" forms get siphoned off.

Bump.

To turn what I previously said into particular advice: make it clear that you have a sort of "classic" crossover and then the various other forms and that we have an index of all of them.

Lemme try a bit.

There, happy now?

edited 23rd Jan '11 6:58:31 PM by SomeSortOfTroper

If we keep the original Crossover, then we need to get it fixed in the database. It's default name (as you get from search) is Crossover. And, yes, we've fixed things like that before: you cutlist and then recreate with the proper capitalization.

edited 5th Feb '11 8:59:31 PM by BigT

So have the changes mentioned in post 6 been implemented? Is it still too limiting for the term as currently understood by the general fan populace? Is hewing to the term as currently understood by the general fan populace something we want to do?

On the last one... Yes. It's called a preexisting term.

Crossover should probably be the page of a supertrope with links to the subtropes and no examples (they should all go under the relevant subtrope). For what the current definition of Crossover is... it should probably have a more descriptive name, like Same Universe Crossover or something. That name's terrible, but something along those lines.

In House Crossover would probably work for what you're thinking of.

edited 8th Jun '11 1:20:43 AM by Specialist290

Yes, I did what I said I'd do. It probably doesn't solve the real problem but it does, I hope, at least explain what the page is doing. The real problem is probably that people use crossover for the supertrope and we don't... in fact, we do, we call them all crossovers, we've split off the classic form of the crossover, we just haven't formed a name for the classic crossover.

I think all we need to do is take what is on this page, move it to Classic Crossover and make "Crossover" the index and supertrope.

We already have Crossover Index.

We could always redirect "crossover" to that....

I have to bump this again.

It's also worth pointing out: yes, I am well aware that the Crossover Index exists and I have mentioned it already, it would save us some time if you interpreted the statement with that context but nevertheless, even if ignorant of Crossover Index, I don't think it matters- if Crossover is the index and supertrope then our problem is solved.

I have created a page action crowner to help move things along.

OK, the Crowner is pretty much done on this. It got to the current colours after a few days and after all this time has managed to acrue one extra vote.

Transferring and making the supertrope index will be easy but making a name and simple description for the new subtrope will need some work.

Intercontinuity Crossover exists.

I see stores and companies constantly using the term "crossover" to try and sell Batman crossovers and Superman crossovers.

edited 11th Jul '11 11:26:59 AM by Vyctorian

That's not what we're talking about, we're talking about:

which is much more specific.

I say that not a true crossover then as thats hardy done outside of comic books.

Side note: the term being described as "classic crossover" seems much newer than the general, broad concept of a crossover, which (arguably) dates back to ancient mythology.

Well I started using classic because the article implied that is what the term was first being used for. I have no particularly strong reason to believe it. However the evidence goes against thinking of it as the old style of doing any crossover.

I thought we should just have a term to talk about it for this discussion. I think it wouldn't work as a name and we should pick something else. I thought of something but I forgot it.

We'll probably be better off if we go through the unsorted examples on Crossover at the moment and try to categorise them. We might decide "oh, actually let's lump this in with Cross Through but hey, we found some other examples which could use a good home".

Bump.

So is anything ever going to get done about this?

There is now an alt titles crowner for the "classic" crossover trope here. I haven't put anything on it except a description of the trope.

Turn crossover into crossover index, the end.

I like that idea.