We've already had one question that has basically decided that if people want to talk about fantasy here, it's okay, but the name sci-fi would discourage them. There have been other hints from other questions that a fantasy site might be in order, or we might just want to drop the wall entirely. So, I'm going to put it point blank, should we change the name of this site to openly allow fantasy? A proposed name could be speculative fiction, or the more common Science Fiction and Fantasy.

EDIT: Tony Meyer has a very good point. I'm going to propose that any change in the name wait for at least 2 weeks. However, I still think it's a good idea to talk about it now.

  • I think "Science Fiction and Fantasy" would be good, at least, for a while. Commented Jan 22, 2011 at 23:18
  • Does the new "discuss" functionality in Area51 allow us to bring this up with the followers of the relevant proposals? (i.e. the ones that Dori lists). It would be useful to have their opinion.
    – Tony Meyer
    Commented Jan 28, 2011 at 20:14
  • @Tony I think it does, as it seems to be sort of a meta-area51. But I agree, we should wait a bit before crossing that bridge. Things have settled here, but there needs to be some more time. The shakedown cruise is still underway!
    – morganpdx
    Commented Jan 28, 2011 at 21:01
  • 1
  • Marked status-completed, although the actual name change for the site will appear shortly. Commented Feb 3, 2011 at 18:19

4 Answers 4


I think several existing proposals should be merged into this site:

If that's the consensus, I think the site should be renamed to SFF (“Science Fiction and Fantasy”).

  • 3
    I don't know what the SE plan is regarding semi-duplicate proposals like this, but assuming they accept it, it seems like a good idea (at some stage) to me. Given the problems we have had here, I can't see how a ST/SW site could succeed on its own.
    – Tony Meyer
    Commented Jan 22, 2011 at 23:49
  • I think this should be an eventual goal, just not yet. Commented Jan 23, 2011 at 0:00
  • I totally agree, Star Trek and Star Wars are just ghost proposals now anyway. Commented Jan 23, 2011 at 1:15
  • @Dori because I imagine it doesn't have much of a future, now that this site is launched and covers the same subject matters. Commented Jan 23, 2011 at 3:04
  • It depends on how we merge them. We are maintaining a ridiculously narrow scope on this site. Much more narrow than I think some of those sites intend. If we're willing to open up the scope, then I might be for it. If we continue to maintain a restrictively narrow scope -- relegated mostly to in and out of universe trivia -- then I do not support it. Commented Jan 24, 2011 at 0:56
  • 1
    Star Trek and Star Wars are now closed, to be merged with this site. I've posted a discussion on the other 3 proposals, with the proposal of merging with this site. Commented Jan 29, 2011 at 14:13
  • Was anyone here following/committed to ST/SW? When they were closed as dupes were the followers/committers notified? It would be great to get those users to come and participate here (any that aren't already).
    – Tony Meyer
    Commented Jan 31, 2011 at 1:11
  • 1
    @ToneyMeyer: The proposal has a re-direct to this site, I don't know if they were emailed out. Hmmm... Commented Jan 31, 2011 at 3:07

I've been thinking about it for a while, and I support merging in Fantasy to this site. The subjects are normally very closely related and inter-mix a lot.

  • Downvoting here because I agree with Tony's answer. Commented Jan 23, 2011 at 0:00
  • can you elaborate a bit about what the merge process is? Is there a set period of time that the Area51 merge proposal remains open? Do the Fantasy followers (ok, there's only 26 including me) get a notification at any point? How does the rename of this site get handled? Has a public beta merged with an Area51 proposal before?
    – Tony Meyer
    Commented Feb 3, 2011 at 8:44
  • obviously no need now!
    – Tony Meyer
    Commented Feb 3, 2011 at 19:23

I think it would have been great to have been a "speculative fiction" site all along, and that at some point merging this site and fantasy.stackexchange.com (assuming it makes it to beta) would be an excellent idea.

However, I think this is a very bad time to do this.

Whether or not a question is scifi or fantasy does not appear to be one of the most pressing issues that the site faces at the moment. Opening up the site would presumably get more users/views, but if you look at the questions on Area51 for fantasy, there are many that are the same questions that are currently causing problems here. ISTM that adding more would simply exacerbate the problems we already face.

To me, it seems questionable whether this site will make it out of beta (obviously, I hope it will, and I'm trying to help make it so). If it doesn't, and we've subsumed fantasy.stackexchange.com, then we've taken them down with us, rather than giving them a chance to succeed by learning from our problems.

I think at the moment, it would increase the number of problems with our site. Once we're more settled, I think this would be a great idea (assuming that the people following the fantasy Area51 proposal agree, otherwise we are hijacking their proposal).

  • 1
    Hmmm... I see your point. Still, I think we might want to do it at some point in time, maybe 1 month into the beta when things are going a bit smoother... Commented Jan 22, 2011 at 21:33
  • 1
    The flip side, is that if/when a merge happens the issues will come up again. Do we want one big rough time figuring things out or one big and one possibly (or possibly not) smaller time if/when fantasy is merged?
    – Zypher
    Commented Jan 22, 2011 at 22:01
  • 3
    @zypher it's only speculation, of course, but ISTM that if we have already figured things out here (especially the key things like lists/'googleable answers'/identification) then if fantasy is merged we'll already have the answers, so it'll just be a case of applying the policy.
    – Tony Meyer
    Commented Jan 22, 2011 at 23:16
  • 1
    Also, if a merge causes us to re-examine policies we've agreed on... that'd be okay. I support getting our own house in order before looking for roommates. Commented Jan 22, 2011 at 23:59
  • @Zypher: None of the other sites are going to enter beta any time soon. As long as this change occurs before they enter beta, it shouldn't harm anything, right? Commented Jan 23, 2011 at 0:31
  • You're right that it would increase the discussion because we would get even more new users, who don't understand what questions are suitable for Stack Exchange. But they problem isn't the amount of discussion, but the lack of any effective decision making. All we do is squabble and nothing get's resolved. The endless discussions are the problem, not the scope of the site
    – Ivo Flipse
    Commented Jan 23, 2011 at 10:32
  • 1
    @Ivo: Things are starting to become resolved. I still am of the opinion that the site is better now than it was a week ago, and much better than the day it opened. It's in good shape, I think. Commented Jan 23, 2011 at 17:26

According to a meta discussion on Area 51 including Tony Meyer, it seems like Imagination overflow could be a great final name for this site. What do you think about this name ? Does it conveys a general enough meaning ? or is it too generic ... or specific (can't ... resist ... the pun) ?

  • 1
    I like it as a tagline, not as a site name. However, the overflow reference only makes sense to SO users, so it would only be useful marketing to that audience, IMO.
    – Tony Meyer
    Commented Feb 2, 2011 at 10:28
  • Sorry, but -1 for Imagination overflow. Commented Feb 2, 2011 at 21:29

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .