Fanlore:Featured Article Nominations

From Fanlore
Jump to: navigation, search

WIP: We're working on this admin article!

This page lists active nominations for future featured articles. For general information about the featured article process, consult Fanlore:Featured Articles.

Nomination criteria

Featured Article nomination requirements lists criteria that should be considered when nominating a potential new Featured Article page.

Adding a nomination

To add a nomination, add a subsection with the format below in the 'Current nominations' section of this page. Featured Article Nomination process has additional information.

=== [[Page title]] ===

Nominated by [[User:Username|]] on DATE. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. 

(Add other comments here)

Commenting on a nomination

Check out the sections below and add your approval, rejection or other comments. If you have reservations about the quality of a nominated article, please explain why. All editors are welcome to fix problems that have been flagged up and say the issue has been resolved. Make sure to bold the main word(s) in your vote: 'yes,' 'no,' 'hesitant yes,' and so on.

Please don't forget to sign your comments ("~~~~" will insert your name and date)):

* '''Yes.''' That looks great! --~~~~
* '''Yes.''' Good one! --~~~~
* '''Hesitant yes.''' Maybe that intro could be fleshed out a bit more? It doesn't really explain much. --~~~~
* '''No.''' This needs more [[PPOV]]. --~~~~

Please do not remove any nominations, or edit content signed by other users. Fanlore staff and gardeners monitor this page and will archive or move nominations to the list of upcoming nominations as needed.

Past nominations

Current nominations

RaceFail '09

Nominated by Kingstoken (talk) on July 10, 2018. As of this writing, the page has an intro and no content flags.

Not yet but almost. I think this will be a great Featured Article, but there are a few issues to sort out before we go forward - I've made some edits to the page and flagged unaddressed issues on the talk page. (It's mostly citation/reference stuff.) - Fandomgeographies (talk) 23:10, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Hesitant yes Overall it does a good job of explaining the event and has a lot of reaction, but the beginning of the How It Began Section is... idk it just throws me off a bit. Mlemley (talk) 04:14, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Hesitant yes This is very sensitive issue which may upset some people. WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 19:18, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes. While there might still be room for improvement -such as giving the How It Began section a more comprehensive structure- the article is overall highly detailed and rich in information. It also documents a pivotal event in online fandom culture that younger fans might not fully be aware of. I believe it's important to preserve and feature this particular aspect of fandom history, as uncomfortable as it might make some people. – Gem (talk) 09:45, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes. While it might not be perfect, I think it still has a lot of important information, and while it is, as WhatAreFrogs mentioned, a sensitive issue, I think BECAUSE of that it deserves a place of recognition. --Punkpixieprince (talk) 18:26, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

The Ring of Soshern

Nominated by MPH on September 15, 2018. It is one of the earliest circulated slash media stories, and the hook into the highly controversial print zine Alien Brothers is also interesting. MPH (talk) 15:07, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes this is a very detailed page. WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 09:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes very interesting, one question, do we know if the author was upset about the unauthorized publication? The article says she never intended it for publication, but it doesn't really specify her feelings after the the fact. I am also going to mention, because someone else is bound to, that we have a lot of feature articles about Star Trek, I know it is kind of unavoidable considering how much apart of fandom history they are, but if this article is approved this will be, I think, the fifth featured article this year related to Star Trek fandom. -- Kingstoken (talk) 10:46, 21 September 2018
The Alien Brothers page has a tiny bit more info on that, though it doesn't mention how the author felt. I'll add a cross-link to the page, though. -- enchantedsleeper (talk) 20:31, 14 October 2018
Maybe not It's a very interesting page, but... well, maybe if it's the last Star Trek nomination of the year? But I just don't think it's good advertising to overly favor one fandom (especially an old western media fandom) in the featured article section and we should start thinking about that. If we want to show off more interesting old Star Trek things, adding some kind of section on fannish history would be great and allow the Fanlore social media accounts to show off more than one article a week... but with Featured Article nominations the spread should be a little more even, I think. -- Hoopla (talk) 23:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)


Nominated by enchantedsleeper on October 12, 2018. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

It's challenge season, so this would be a very timely article to feature; the page is thorough and interesting. I should note that the challenge was co-founded by astolat, which could make us (as an OTW wiki) seem to be promoting our "own" challenge. But in my opinion Yuletide has enough fandom clout and history behind it to stand on its own. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 21:36, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
Maybe - It is a very detailed article, but a little disorganized (eg, has "History" and "The Yuletide Archive and Collection"; "How It Works" and "The Challenge";) plus parts of it slip into advice about how to best participate ("The urge to sign up for any source you've ever even heard of is strong. It's important to remember...") and I think there's a stark lack of internal links, probably because when it was written there weren't many exchange terms defined on the site, and still aren't. Not that anyone would know because you can't find exchange glossary terms for love or money in the challenges section. I also wish the culture section had... more? I don't know enough about Yuletide to say if there's more to be had, but still. - Hoopla (talk) 06:36, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes: Very detailed, but I agree with Hoopla. Also, it seems a little choppy and repetitive in some places, which maybe more of a wording issue if nothing else. -- Kingstoken (talk) 20:48, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes Interesting article. ) added some wiki links, fixed some typos and made a small addition (re: Secret Santa but with fics and reveal of the gifter) since I found the description how it works made it sound way more complicated than it is... WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:21, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Crack Van

Nominated by Shadowkeeper on October 14, 2018. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Hesitant Yes: The article talks a lot about the closure of the site, but doesn't go into great detail about what Crack Van was like in its hey day, how influential it was, and it only gives three fan reaction quotes, for something with over a decade of importance that seems kind of scant -- Kingstoken (talk) 22:54, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes I'm with Kingstoken, this one could use some more "meat". WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:21, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

So I’m on AO3 ...(the forgotten history of disclaimers)

Nominated by Kingstoken (talk) on October 18, 2018. As of this writing the page has no content flags.

Viral Tumblr post that covers a lot of fandom history
Hesitant yes: I really like this topic and think it makes a great subject for a Featured Article. The only reason I'm hesitant is that it feels like the page could use some additional structure to make it more reader-friendly. Having said that, it's already subdivided by topic and I know how hard it is to structure something that's literally a conversation, never mind one that took place on Tumblr over a long period of time. If everyone else is happy with the structure - or doesn't think it needs anything extra - then I am *thumbs up* -- enchantedsleeper (talk) 12:12, 21 October 2018
Maybe: I like this as a topic but I really think the structure needs to be improved. Maybe some way to thread the chosen comments, so it's not constantly "Y's reply to X person" such that you're scrolling up and down to see who's who? --Math-is-magic (talk) 23:43, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
We could use the thing I have at the bottom of my talk page? I could also try to come up with a New Template but I'm not sure what it would look like. - Hoopla (talk) 00:02, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Not Yet: I'd love to have this article featured but I agree with Enchantedsleeper that it needs structure and with Math that it's too hard to read. So far, to help fix this, I've made Template:NQuote and Template:NQuote2 and I've switched all the comment quotes over to NQuote and started nesting things but it's a lot or work — almost none of these comments have citations so to find out who's actually replying to who I had to go hunting for tumblr posts. So far I have only completed the Anne McCaffery/Pern section and it took me all day even though I didn't even do anything with most of the reference tags. All of the "x replied to y" information is about x reblogging from y, which unfortunately makes it really hard to follow the conversations as they actually occur because there could be thousands of silent reblogs between one comment and the next. I'd welcome opinions on how the nesting looks and also help sourcing all of these quotes.
I also wonder if we should cut down the number of comments in some sections (I think the pern one is maybe overly long?) or do some summarizing or... something? - Hoopla (talk) 01:29, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
I vote yes because it covers a very important part of fandom history on a very broad base. I also added/fixed some wiki links. WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:21, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes' MPH (talk) 03:51, 17 December 2018 (UTC)


Nominated by Shadowkeeper on 2 December 2018. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Recently updated and up to date.
Yes: A well filled out article, I added some links. However, I do think the common tropes in G/B fanfiction needs to be filled out a little more, it mentions a few tropes, but dosn't go into any detail. Also, I have complained about too many Start Trek nominees in the past, but I think this one, if approved, would probably be featured next year so it wouldn't add to the five we've had this year -- Kingstoken (talk 22:16, 02 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes: Very interesting and detailed page. I understand the temptation to avoid ST nominations. But when there's a revival of a fandom and a ship, it's a brand new to many and I think its important to highlight. I added a Shippers guide to the galaxy meta vid on this pairing. --Auntags (talk) 14:18, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes: It's a good artticle. WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:54, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes' MPH (talk) 03:51, 17 December 2018 (UTC)


Nominated by Shadowkeeper on 2 December 2018. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

A well known fanvid
Yes: If a little more about how it went viral could be added this would be great, especially because it wasn't on YouTube originally. But other than that it is interesting -- Kingstoken (talk 22:29, 02 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes: Although I also feel it's missing a bit on why it wen viral and where. Also almost half the fan reactios are not in Egnlish, so it seems it might have had some larger inpact outside the anglophone world? I think I even rememberind seeing a bit of this on morning televison in Germany as well when the 300 boom as huge. But then the movie inspired lots of memes... WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:54, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes: MPH (talk) 03:50, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Was Fanfic Any Different in the Olden Days?

Nominated by Shadowkeeper on 2 December 2018. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Lots of fan reaction and discussion.
Yes: Wish there was a bit more in the Femslash section, but other wise very interesting. Also, it is pretty ponderous in length, if we could find a way to collapse some of the sections, so people could click if they wanted to read more, would be helpful -- Kingstoken (talk) 22:25, 02 December 2018
Yes I'll get to work on Kingstoken's suggestion about the collapsable sections; that shouldn't be too hard. Can we figure out how to redo the sections with little summaries of the topics? It would let us move the internal links out of the section headers and maybe cut down the length of some of the section titles. - Hoopla (talk) 22:47, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes. Kids today, they don't know how good/easy they have it nowadays. Not reading through 2 pages of disclaimers or being sued by the IP owner ;-) WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:54, 16 December 2018 (UTC)


Nominated by Shadowkeeper on 2 December 2018. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Hesitant Yes: it has a lot of canon, but some fandom activity seems to be mixed in with the canon info. I'm not sure, it's well done, but at first glance it appears that one has to scroll down quite a ways to find fandom activities -- Kingstoken (talk) 23:22, 02 December 2018 (UTC)
Maybe there is a Discord section which is currently empty so this an case of {{Expand}} and thus not yet eligible (or the discord section should be removed)? I also remember some hoopla around the movie with certain fanboys not to pleased with the movie because it dared to differ from the graphic novel (see here and here for example searching for Watchmen and fanboys) which is also missing from the article (or maybe should be part of Meta section or Watchmen Fandom in the media?) WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:54, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Help Haiti

Nominated by Kingstoken (talk) on December 17, 2018. As of this writing the page has a good intro and no content flags.