Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Progression fantasy

Progression fantasy

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article currently seems to be largely based on unreliable blogs (reader's grotto, and Andrew Rowe - a non notable self-described author of "progression fantasy", who actually claims to have been involved in the coining/publicization of the term (not an independent source). I spent some time looking for more substantial sources about the genre, and it's pretty limited. A couple books are described by their authors as instances of it (), and there is a Bachelor's thesis that mentions the concept. There's a mention in an article in USA Today, which describes the genre as a "parent" of LitRPG. Otherwise, there's quite a lot of reddit threads (which, apparently, google considers 'news' these days) mentioning the concept.

But, fundamentally, that is the sum of coverage that I found. We have some unreliable blogs, some authors proposing their works as what they want to make a "new genre". It does seem to be sort of real, but equally does not seem to have attracted independent analysis as a genre. There's essentially one sentence in a reliable, independent source. That's not enough to establish notability, and not even enough to build an article on. Given the lack of coverage here, I would tend to favor deletion, but at the very least this should probably be merged or redirected elsewhere. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:09, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Literature. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:09, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
comment re-reading a discussion that linked above (*facepalm*) I saw a user link a review published in the SFRA Review that does have a paragraph or so about the genre. Still, not really enough for a stand alone article imo. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:15, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Add a few sentences about it to LitRPG from the few RS we have then redirect. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:57, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

TO those voting "merge" - there isn't much here reliably sourced to merge. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:28, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Merge: This term seems to be used, and it would be a shame not to provide an explanation to the users of Wikipedia. Sourcing is thin, tough, with mostly definition and examples. So covering this within another article based on WP:ATD is probably best. Scopewise List of genres, where it is already mentioned, seems best. I was wondering if this is too central a spot, but this scholarly article does just that, briefly covering it in a overview over all of literature. I assume from the definition that not all progression fantasy would fall under LitRPG, but if it is felt that that article best allows for a reasonable coverage of the topic, that's also fine with me. Daranios (talk) 15:24, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Comment. The term is used briefly here https://sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/vrmmorpg . I was digging into related concepts recently (disclaimer: writing that very article) and I feel this should be a notable concept, but it may also be that its a bit WP:TOOSOON, as this term is just entering the discourse. That said, I see 33 Google Scholar hits for it, and some GBooks/GNews hits. So WP:THEREMAYBESOURCES. Merging it is somewhat problematic, since I think that while all LitRPG is progression fantasy (because leveling up and gaining power through a system is a clear form of progression), not all prof fant is LitRPG (you can have intense power progression without blue boxes, stat sheets, or video game mechanics). I will need to look more into it; I concur with the nom that the current sourcing is weak, but I am not convinced lack of GNG has been sufficiently demonstrated. Or BEFORE - did the nom look at GS? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:08, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes, naturally I looked at GScholar/GBooks before nomming the article. Pretty much all of the results except for those listed above either use the term in a different context (ie , ,), or are not reliable sources (). GBooks is much the same. Not sure if you're trying to be ironic but your link for THEREMAYBESOURCES is to an essay about exactly why that's an argument to avoid at AfD. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:45, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

@Eddie891 I know it's a weak argument (I created the very redirect I linked too), which is why I wasn't voting keep :P I just wanted to hear your view on the academic sources. Thanks, _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:27, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

Well, yeah, but just because something redirects to something doesn't mean the target is the parent topic. The parent topic can be redirected from as well. For example if a band redirects to the one notable person in it. It's why we have {{R to subtopic}} as well as {{R from subtopic}}. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:27, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Redirect to LitRPG. The sourcing is too thin for a full article. On where to redirect: USA Today says it's the "parent genre" of LitRPG; CBR calls it "a cousin" to LitRPG; and SFE calls the two "adjacent concepts". Based on this I've added a couple of sentences to LitRPG, so it's now a plausible target. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 23:16, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
I think this would be a good outcome. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 23:50, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
Redirect per Olivaw-Daneel. I think that's as good a target as any. Ideally there would be a small subsection for progression fantasy - maybe within the history section? That way it has a more clean redirect target to help show that they are different concepts. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:32, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Redirect per Olivaw-Daneel, due to the added paragraph in the related genres section. In solidarity, PokemonPerson (talk) 17:06, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

Redirect to Hero's journey, as they pretty much seem to describe the same thing. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:48, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

@SarekOfVulcan: While the definitions sound pretty similar - and there may be a problem in the phrasing there - I see the difference in the "emphasis on character development, progression in skill or abilities, and the attainment of greater power". Like, I would say, the Odyssey is a pretty good example of a hero's journey, but does not spend any time on describing how Odysseus gets more capable and attains new skills which help him overcome the next challenge. He already has his set of abilities before everything ever starts. (So, many progression fantasy stories may be hero's journeys, but not the other way round.) Daranios (talk) 15:09, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

Huh. For some reason I thought that training was explicitly a part of the Hero's Journey, but I see our article doesn't say that (except for the more recent version, where it refers to a mentor). I don't retract it, though - as you say, many progression fantasies follow the archetype. Can you think of any offhand that don't? SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:16, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

@SarekOfVulcan: I am just learning about this from the article and the secondary sources, and I don't know the examples well enough, so, no, I would not have such an example at the moment. But I would like to a) expand, using the SFE defintion "Progression Fantasy refers to works emphasizing the systematic acquisition of power and skills", that the creators of the term seem to refer mostly to newer works where there specifically exists that emphasis. So Dragonball yes, but Star Wars no, because even though Luke undergoes training, but it's only one episode that's not specifically emphasized in the overall story, and there is no "systematic acquisition". b) More importantly there is no mention of progression fantasy yet at Hero's journey, so a pure redirect does not seem helpful to me. We could create/merge a section there as a closely related topic. But the secondary sources do not explicitely make the connection between progression fantasy and the hero's journey, so that would feel somewhat like WP:Original research. An implicit connection may be there, but it's not on a WP:SKYISBLUE level. And that problem exists neither at List of genres nor at LitRPG as a target. Daranios (talk) 10:46, 30 June 2026 (UTC)