Category talk:Scandals
Disputed Categorization
The criteria for pages to be categorized as Scandals is currently a bit nebulous. Scandals are distinct from Fandom Wars in that, generally, at least one side of the conflict is an individual, not an unidentified group, and thus are held accountable for their actions. Glossary Term pages like Sockpuppet are also included in the category because those actions are/cause scandals.
A page that is not mainly about a disagreement may be categorized in Scandals if the controversy around it is a significant part of its relevance in fandom. So far I've only added the category to pages about people if is seems like there's enough info about the controversy for its own page. If a new page like "[Person Name]'s Sockpuppets" is created, then the category with be added to the new page and may be removed from the main page. Please discuss any questions/objections/suggestions. – caes (talk) 01:01, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
- I'm wondering if we shouldn't just rename this page to "Wank" and be done with it? "Scandals" sounds so... high society. Most of the pages in this category aren't scandalous, they're just shitstorms - that's different xD
- Also, I'm wondering what makes something belong in this category instead of simply Fandom Occurrences, which I know also contains various wank pages. -- enchantedsleeper (talk) 16:53, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
- Related to this, I was wondering why My Immortal (Harry Potter story) is in this category instead of Category:Fandom Occurrences? It was - absolute mayhem at the time, but I wouldn't class it as a scandal. I left a comment on the My Immortal talk page, but got no response there, so hopefully someone here can help.
- Also while looking through this category, I noticed that a number of person and fan pages are included here. I know we have a policy on not adding fans to fandom categories, so I thought it was a bit strange to see fans added to the Scandals category. For example, MsScribe is the pinnacle of controversial fans and I agree pages related to that controversy belong here (and in this case the pages are in both Fandom Occurrences and Scandals). But I don't think her fan page belongs here. That just strikes me as - not right somehow. --Auntags (talk) 21:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The category "Fandoms by Source Text" does not seem appropriate here. It would mean that there is a book or tv show or movie or comic book called "Scandals" that has a fandom. If you mean that some fans like to watch wank, this could be a subcategory under Fan Activities.--aethel (talk) 23:56, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
- That was just a mistake I made while using the template. Thanks for letting me know. – caes (talk) 00:46, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
On the Removal of Fan/Person pages
I firmly believe a person cannot be a scandal. A person's actions can be scandalous and where we have a page related to that scandal it can be included here. But I have removed all person and fan pages from the category. I raised that issue in June but since then there's been no explanation about why fan pages can be in the scandal category. A lot of the same issues with adding fandom categories apply here - how to do we determine who is a scandalous fan and who is not? It could also result in the category been added to fans who are involved in wank or deemed to be inappropriately shipping in their fandom.
I also have deep reservations about the inclusions of fan communities in this category for the same reasons. There are also fanfictions here that made more contributions to fandom than just the scandal related to them. But I've left them here for now. The criteria for a pages inclusion in this category really needs clarifying. --Auntags (talk) 14:44, 21 November 2020 (UTC)