Talk:Main Page

From Fan History Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Archive one of previous discussion on this talk page


This discussion is listed as an Active Talk Page.
Please remove this template when the conversation has run its course.


Contents

Page Information

Also fun! Tag on ?action=info to the end of a page and find out:

  • Number of watchers
  • Number of edits (content page)
  • Number of distinct authors (content page)

Examples: Velocityofsound Harry Potter Cassandra Claire

No idea what I'm doing

Is there a page that says how to format each type of page and how much detail to go into? Because if there is I can't find it. Shwoo 07:35, 3 September 2007 (CDT)

The template category (here) has all the different templates that articles should be based on, so that's a good place to start. As far as what should be included, the more you write, the better! Dates of important events and story publications, links to fights, summaries of discussions... Whatever relates to the history of a fandom. Jae 07:50, 18 September 2007 (CDT)

Style guides, rules

Hey Laura, I think that having style guides and editing rules might help people unfamiliar with Wikis (or encyclopedias altogether). Maybe have a "Before You Begin" article/section or something to that effect. -Jae 09:25, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

That might be worth considering. The only thing I have now is Help:Contents which is pretty much lacking. I'll try to get to it some time later this week. (As I write this, I'm a bit jet lagged. Then tomorrow, work. And some meta.) I'll quickly toss some basic rules on the this page too. --Laura 10:20, 8 October 2007 (CDT)
Ok, cool! Sounds good. I'm kind of baffled that so many people don't seem to have a clue about how this works. My faith in humanity was foolishly optimistic, I guess. -Jae 10:38, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Oh hell, a lot of pages were screwed up in the first place because I didn't know how it worked. ;-) But yeah. Some of it is baffling. People repeatedly edited the Template:Person page to include details about themselves, rather than renaming it and then copying and pasting. :/ (Hence, the reason that page was locked to just sysops.) Added a bit to the rules and guidelines which mentioned the third person. Added some discussion on the talk page for Template:Person to highlight that third person thing. The thing is though, people don't seem to view the help page so doubtful... but one hopes they'll come back and learn and add more because a lot of the personal biography information might be interesting to add to the whole fandom or ship biography pages... and yeah. :/ *babbles* --Laura 10:46, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Ooh, that Help page is great. That's exactly what I was thinking. Hopefully that'll point people in the right direction! I agree that using a wiki is a learning experience (I only just figured out how to redirect pages a few days ago!), but yeah, writing articles in first person? Um, hello? What kind of encyclopedia uses first person POV? Blarg. -Jae 10:16, 16 October 2007 (CDT)
That's good that it works. I added a bit more to the template section. Anything you add is all good. :) I just wish certain people like elfwreck would get that. :( --Laura 12:24, 16 October 2007 (CDT)

Huh?

What kind of website is this? If this website is a fan fiction Wiki it includes Command and Conquer and Starcraft Fan Fiction right? Also where is the blocking policy?(76.247.222.101 00:40, 20 February 2008 (CST))

Fan History is a wiki dedicated to documenting the history of fandom. Details about Fan History can be found at Fanhistory.com:About. Starcraft is mentioned but not with any real depth as we've not had many active contributors interested in detailing the history of the fandom. The blocking policy can be found at Help:Rules which includes various rules for the wiki. Details regarding information inclusion or exclusion, and Fan History's philosophy, are available at Fanhistory.com:Philosophy. Article deletion information can be found at Help:Article deletion. If you have any additional questions, please feel free to ask. --Laura 12:50, 20 February 2008 (CST)

Hello, this is Serprex from Novelas. A user by alias of PurplePopple recently requested a link here be included in our fanfic section. Seeing as writing FanFic is just as relevant to the history of FanFic as history is to the writing of FanFic, your contributors may do well with a useful link on where they can output their own works --Serprex

Standardization

Is it:

  • fan fiction
  • fanfiction
  • fan-fiction
  • fanfic
  • fic
  • fanwork
  • muzzlewort?

What's the term standard on fanhistory.com?


Fan fiction is the term I use and is the one used in most templates and page names. Other uses are found but much less common. (And in the search results tend to be author names.) --Laura 23:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Standard category heading?

Is the category that contains fanfiction (see above) articles:

Fandom + "fanfic" or Fandom + "stories"?

I'm going to try to lock down the categories on Forever Knight and SAJV and want them to meet standardization.

Also, I mistakenly assumed that 'stories' was a term for fandom lore. Which I'm going to need for FK, because we've had a lot of interesting things happen in and around the fandom - far too many for a single 'lore' page. So I'd like to set up a category where people can put in artcles about events, which can then be edited by others who were there. I'd like to use a 'lore' standardization to indicate that.

Please advise.

Thanks!

You know, for your category, standardize as you need. That really hasn't been something that has happened in other fandoms yet so I have no easy answer. We'll probably follow your lead in how to integrate. And if you could put how you do it on your fandom specific help pages, we'll use that explanation to create a broader, pan fandom explanation for how to deal with it. --Laura 23:30, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Alpha navigation within a category with over 400 items?

Is there any way to set up an alpha category menu for categories or subcategories that have more than one screen of pages (over 200 entries)? For example, if you go to Category:Television fandoms, there are multiple pages. It would be easier to navigate if you could click on T on the first page and it will take you to the T entries for that category, without having to go page by page, 200 categories at a time.

Please let me know if there's anything that could be used. Thanks.

--Susan M. Garrett 03:33, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't find an extension for MediaWiki that does that. :/ I've let User:Emufarmers know and maybe he can come up with a solution. For long categories, with the idea that no easy solution is likely to be found, the best suggestion might be to pull out articles into subcategories. For some fandoms, the way I've addressed that is by pulling out people who are shippers or including them in the main category AND the ship based category. --Laura 11:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
I thought that might be the case. Would that be worthwhile to do in areas like Television Fandoms - break out the alphas into subcategories? or would that further complicate matters and prevent effective 'browsing' behavior?
My personal preference is not to move the television fandom categories around at the moment. And if any alphabetizing is done, have it as a subcategory option... so Television fandom categories -> Television categories sorted by alpha -> Television fandoms starting with A, Television fandoms starting with B, etc. Or Television fandom categories -> Television categories sorted by genre -> Science fiction television fandoms, Comedy television fandoms, etc. The problem is once you start that, you really need to do it for all the main fandom types on the main page. That way the organization is at least some what consistent. I'd almost rather just ignore that and work on building portals for topics instead of doing that as it might better serve to encourage people to help edit in a category. --Laura 02:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Amending article Pseudonym names in fandom ...

I would like to amend the Pseudonym names in fandom article because there are some misconceptions. As an active fanzine editor in media fandom from 1983 to 2007, about a third of my contributors used pseudonyms in the '80s. Reasons were:
1. They were writing in a number of fandoms and used a different penname in each fandom (mirroring the use of pseudos in pro publishing)
2. They were protecting their 'real' life and reputation (I didn't print adult material, but many found of them used different names to distinuish their gen material from adult - particularly same sex - material, or to provide some minor protection for themselves regarding the legality of writing fan fiction, or the stigma of what was seen as a juvenile pasttime)
3. It was seen as crass or a sign of poor quality for an editor to publish too many of their own works in a single fanzine (so an editor might use pseudonyms to hide the fact that they'd written most of the contents of a fanzine or that one of their authors had been responsible for most of the contents of a fanzine).
4. Pennames were assumed in certain fandoms to indicate the author's attachment to that fandom (like the use of "T'" to pennames to indicate a Spock or Vulcan fan).

It should be easy to verify this by opening any issue of Datazine from that period and looking at the contibutor's names in the pre and post posting listings for fanzines.

Fan artists, particularly cover artists, had much the same experience in terms of their protection of their real lives with regard to the possible legal implications (the actual art not being the problem, but the reproduction of the art for sale) and the adult and same-sex material impacting their professional careers and livelihoods. Fan artists also used pseudos as a 'brand name' of sorts - cover art or interior art by a particular artist was a selling point of a fanzine.

This being said, psuedos at the time were usually typical names (first and last) or a one word name (like "Prince"), different from the internet convention of creating an 'identity' name (like 'ravenslasher').

Please advise on how this article can be amended.

Thanks.

--Susan M. Garrett 21:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The article isn't locked and is pretty grossly incomplete and based only on two references (one of which is only a sole fan's recollections, which definitely presents an incomplete picture and one I'd say is not especially accurate - certainly there is plenty of use of pseudonyms in the 'zines I have from the time periods mentioned.) So I'd say go ahead and expand/correct at will.--Sidewinder 12:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Er. Ditto that. A lot of articles are stubs. Some are incomplete or inaccurate just because no one has tackled them or they represent a narrow view of what was going on in fandom because there is only one contributor. In those cases, the article should really be expanded to represent a more universal view and to make it more accurate.
There are some essays of mine that are locked. Those all (should) have headers at the top that basically say "This is an essay" and be locked to prevent editing. Those would be off limits for people to edit but they can still comment on them on the talk pages. I think there are about 15 such essays at the moment. --Laura 12:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the reponse. I've added the additional information based on what I know of medi fan fiction produced during that ear. I left the Bake's 7 and Anime referenc alone because it might possibly be true - I don't have data to challenge or support those assertions. -- susanmgarrett
Thanks for leaving that information in. I know that some of that information I got from that page was discussed on FCA-l. The Blake's 7 saffic info almost certainly came from there. Anime is another big mess and I don't know beyond what I cited as to what those attitudes are... I'd have to do a bit more research to get a better idea. :/ --Laura 02:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Rauterkus said ...

Need a section for Radio fans. There are many radio talk shows. Lots of fans there. Then there is old-time radio shows, Green Hornet, etc. But that could all be one section at first. (storytelling) Plus, other types of radio too. Short Wave, HAM Radio, Radio Free.... etc. Plus, the podcast world could fit in there too. Many fans of various podcast shows.

--Rauterkus 15:40, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Something like that would be easy enough to add. It is just a matter of once we create articles for those fandoms of having members of the fandom come in and build upon the infrastructure that we create. :) --Laura 17:11, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Actor categories

Do we need Actor name categories?

In my understanding of a wiki, an actor category (Category:Actor Name) series no purpose. The actor should have an article and any article links that would be needed would be within that article. This would include ships, mailing lists, a link to a fans category, links to media articles (movie, television series, play comic book, anime, etc.). The Actor article would then be placed in the main actor fandom category, the television series name category, the movie category, etc.

A visitor will usually type the actor's name into a search engine and see the actor name acticle as a result. They will then click links on that page to move to other pages - they rarely click the links at the bottom of the page unless they want to look at the categories in a larger setting (a television series, for example).

I see the same issue with pairings. A pairing should be an article with links to the character name articles, the series name article, ship members (either as article links or within a category), mailing lists, important fiction, etc. as links within that article.

Please review the work I've done in [[:Category:Actor fandoms:Category:Actor fandoms} and [[Category:Actor fandom categories|Category:Actor fandom categories| to see what I mean.

Thanks! susanmgarrett

Commonalities in Names/Titles

I was just going through something I'd worked on earlier, and discovered that the, at the time, non-existent link to the ABC television network now was clickable. However, it links to a band of the same name, not a TV network.

For names and titles that share commonalities is it possible to add something to differentiate them in the search and internal links? For example, when I read the letters "ABC", the first thing that springs to mind is a US TV network; the second would be an Australian TV network; the third might be the band. Depending on what an article is about, only one of those references would be correct at any given moment. And in my article, it definitely wasn't the band that was being referenced.

Thanks. PfeffermusePepper

I think what's needed here is likely a disambiguation page, and a couple of moves. I'll see what I can do. --Tikatu 12:44, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey Pepper, please see Fanhistory.com:Disambiguation for help in this matter. The general solution is to have a disambiguation page at, say, "ABC", with then "ABC (band)", "ABC (US television network)", "ABC (Australian television network)" listed to differentiate between them. --Sidewinder 12:47, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, Sidewinder. I know nothing about wiki editing, and am just trying to learn as I go along. --Pfeffermuse 16:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
And I just did that. Created a disambiguation. :P I had time to kill and it was easy enough to take care of. Feel free to change the name. I know there is an Aussie broadcaster with the same name. --12:52, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools
Support FH