This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1DaynaRT
These two tags may mean the same thing to some users but others use them in very different ways.
Alternate history can mean the kind of historical fiction meant to answer the what-if questions surrounding real-life events. Something by Harry Turtledove, for example.
Alternative history is used by some to mean nonfiction history that radically differs from normal, accepted history, eg. Holy Blood, Holy Grail.
And to muddy the waters even more, some people reverse the two definitions. Either way I believe they should not be combined.
Alternate history can mean the kind of historical fiction meant to answer the what-if questions surrounding real-life events. Something by Harry Turtledove, for example.
Alternative history is used by some to mean nonfiction history that radically differs from normal, accepted history, eg. Holy Blood, Holy Grail.
And to muddy the waters even more, some people reverse the two definitions. Either way I believe they should not be combined.
2jjwilson61
That may be some people's definitions but I think the waters are muddy enough here that it's more useful to combine than to separate them.
4hailelib
I voted undecided but if I had to choose I am leaning towards separate.
ETA: However when I go to the pages a lot of the same books are on both...
ETA: However when I go to the pages a lot of the same books are on both...
5jjwilson61
I remember voting on this before. I wish there was an easier way to search on the tag combination page.
6DaynaRT
>2 jjwilson61:
If it's more useful to combine, I wonder why the separations between that two terms that were proposed several days ago all seem to have passed?
>3 lilithcat:
I don't know that anything can be done with the multitude of abbreviations.
If it's more useful to combine, I wonder why the separations between that two terms that were proposed several days ago all seem to have passed?
>3 lilithcat:
I don't know that anything can be done with the multitude of abbreviations.
7jjwilson61
6> If it's more useful to combine, I wonder why the separations between that two terms that were proposed several days ago all seem to have passed?
Is that why I remember seeing this before. I believe I voted against that. I also think that in many cases people don't see the color or slight wording difference and think they're voting on a combination instead of a separation.
Is that why I remember seeing this before. I believe I voted against that. I also think that in many cases people don't see the color or slight wording difference and think they're voting on a combination instead of a separation.
8MikeBriggs
I do not recall the seperation vote. Sorry for getting the waters all muddy again by proposing to combine the tags again.
There really should be a separate "combine" and "separate" section when voting. I've more than once had to switch my votes around when voting. Though I catch it about 95% of the time before leaving the voting page, or refreshing.
There really should be a separate "combine" and "separate" section when voting. I've more than once had to switch my votes around when voting. Though I catch it about 95% of the time before leaving the voting page, or refreshing.
9jjwilson61
1> If different people use the terms in opposite ways then I don't see any point in trying to keep them separate.
