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

Female-Presenting Nipples

Nominated by MPH (talk) on January 4, 2019.

Hesitant Yes: I hesitate because I am afraid that it might be a little too new. It is obviously timely, but it still has content tags asking for examples, and I think it will probably get a little filled out as time goes by. Although if you are trying to get new users interested in helping with an article this one would probably be attractive. -- Kingstoken (talk) 2:26, 04 January 2019 (UTC)
Hesitant yes. I like the article a lot, and I'm personally not too concerned about it being too new - but I do think that while it has Examples Wanted/Needs Expansion flags on it, we might want to hold off. But if other editors feel it's good to go, I'd be inclined to say yes.- Fandomgeographies (talk) 18:15, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes: I'm with Kingstoken, I think the topic is still too new. WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 19:03, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Also hesitant, but keen: I do think this would be a great subject to feature and a good "window" into the wider issue that is the Tumblr NSFW Content Purge. It's funny, people relate to it, and there are some great memes xD But we should take care of those content flags before we feature it. I will see what I can do to add more detail about the responses and discussion (also not sure if those two need to be separate sections? A restructure might be in order...) --enchantedsleeper (talk) 21:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes. It's a very engaging article but my only concern is that it doesn't technically fulfil all the Featured Article criteria due to the 'needs expansion' flags. However, perhaps bending the rules on this one might result in people adding more content post-feature. – Gem (talk) 18:35, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Audiofic Archive

Nominated by enchantedsleeper on January 27, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

A good page about a very important podfic archive. We may need to confirm whether the Archive really is still active (it doesn't appear to have been active since 2016), but otherwise it seems up-to-date. -- enchantedsleeper (talk) 21:37, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Yes: It looks like the the last fics posted were in February 2017, do we know if they are still accepting fics? -- Kingstoken (talk) 22:12, 27 January 2019
Yes. (Based off this exchange on Twitter, I think it's pretty much inactive?) - Fandomgeographies (talk) 21:52, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes: A solid article about a significant archive, but I think it would be a lot stronger with some quotes from archive maintainers, especially from 2016. – caes (talk) 23:17, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
Not Yet: the infobox mentions years 2016-2017 there seems to be not information on the article what happened after 2016? WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
I've built up info about the crash and the aftermath, so I think that's good. I added a Reactions & Reviews that I hope can have quotes to express how widely used and convenient the archive was. – caes (talk) 05:01, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Not Yet. There's an Examples Wanted tag for Reactions/Reviews, and I think it could benefit from a brief list of audiofic examples. --Punkpixieprince (talk) 02:30, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Alternate Universe

Nominated by Caessius on February 04, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro.

Yes. I'm voting yes, although we do need to resolve the Examples Wanted flags first. I think the template under subtypes could be removed - it'll never be a completely comprehensive list, but it covers a lot of ground. It might be nice to add more under canonical use, but again, there's some good information there. Maybe an editor would be up for working on this page and posting on the talk page about removing the templates, once any additional content has been added as needed? - Fandomgeographies (talk) 03:23, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes: I am saying yes, but something will have to be done about the expand tag in the canon uses section, I didn't fell comfortable removing it, because perhaps it is not comprehensive enough, but I could be wrong. I removed the examples tag from the subtypes section, because we have a lot of examples listed. Over all a well filled out articles if a few minor tweaks can be made. -- Kingstoken (talk) 14:42, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Not Yet Since article currently still has an {{ExamplesWanted}} flag in the Canonical Use section. Also the Comments by fans could use some more content, since there is quite a gap between 1993 and 200. I'm sure there is more content about that out there. Also if Coffee Shop AU is featured soon (see above) we might want to hold on this one a bit since it's similar to that. WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
I added two examples of canonical use that I think are important, but they're both from western media. So I didn't remove {{ExamplesWanted}} in case it was looking for more anime/manga examples. Maybe whoever put that tag in could clarify or remove as appropriate. Also there's a citation error at the bottom of the page that I don't know how to fix. I like this page, but not ready to weigh in on it yet. --Auntags (talk) 18:47, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Fixed the citation issue -- Kingstoken (talk) 20:37, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
I've removed the examples tag. I initially added it when I split Canonical Uses info off from the general intro. – caes (talk) 21:37, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
I streamlined the canonical section so it could be moved up the article and used as background info; most of the exact details went into references notes, which allowed to me to add more anime/manga. Some things I want to see addressed but didn't get around to/can't do myself:
  • Marvel's What If...? and other canon AUs could use a footnote.
  • Is the single sentence about Constructed reality adequate?
  • Two new flags to expand the article have been added for Mirror Universe and Uber,
Also, please see the talk page for thoughts about the last two paragraphs in the intro section. - Hoopla (talk) 00:55, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Not Yet. Reading through these concerns, as well as the concerns on the talk page, there seems to be a lot of work still to be done and clarifications to be made. --Punkpixieprince (talk) 02:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)


Nominated by Fandomgeographies on February 9, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Hesitant Yes: I think it needs more examples, to give the reader more of an idea of what a flamewar looked like -- Kingstoken (talk) 11:56, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes: I agree with Kingstoken. I think this also extended to Zines (as in letter sections), Message Boards and most can still be witnessed on recently social media plattforms like Twitter and Facebook as well? I think could be included first. Maybe there are famous examples around? WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Not Yet: The intro seems unclear and the page doesn't do much to explain how a flamewar starts, what one is like, or much fannish opinion about them. – caes (talk) 01:55, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Not Yet: I think there's a lot more to be said here. Just looking at the related articles, there are examples of flamewars between fans on different sites and flameswars as a result of comments or incidents involving BNFs. There's also loads of meta, and interviews/comments by fans who've been through the wars. Also Star Wars vs. Star Trek is a red link. --Auntags (talk) 18:06, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
I made a redirect for that red link. MPH (talk) 12:38, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Dead Dog Party

Nominated by Fandomgeographies on February 9, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Maybe; I think it needs more quotes/examples to illustrate what the parties were like -- Kingstoken (talk) 11:59, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes: The first time I heard about that. Would be nice to know if this still a thing in recent cons (pro con and fan cons?). WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Added to the page to say that this activity is only done at fan cons. MPH (talk) 12:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Get 'em

Nominated by Fandomgeographies on February 9, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Hesitant Yes: I think it needs more examples -- Kingstoken (talk) 16:34, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Not yet: I agree that more examples are needed, but also more contextual information like - was this more popular in certain fandoms? Involving certain characters? I remember that 'Get Jack' fanfics were so popular in Pirates of the Caribbean fandom that they were referenced in a fourth-wall-breaking fic series I read. In the same vein, this page's coverage is mostly confined to the 70s and 80s/zine era of fandom when these stories definitely existed in the internet fandom era. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 20:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Not yet: Are there recent fanworks of this? Or is this a thing of the past? Is this a mostly zine thing? I would like to see these questions answered first. WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Not yet: From reading this page I'm unclear on how the genre rose/fell in popularity, if its popularity coincided with or developed into hurt/comfort, and if it's a kink or character bashing thing. – caes (talk) 02:01, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


Nominated by Fandomgeographies on February 9, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Maybe: I am wondering if it might be important to mention the fridging of woman and how that can be used as a source of a character's manpain, also it is such a broad term now, I think that it is used outside of it's original context -- Kingstoken (talk) 12:06, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Not Yet I like Kingtokens suggestion. Mulder ought not to be the only one who has manpain especially because for fridging women out there? This seems quite common in comics books (both Superman and Spider Man come to mind) as well as in video games (Zelda, Super Mario) narratives as well. Edit to Add: also isn't this also a trope by now? WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes: I've added a section for discussion. Check the talk page for ideas about restructuring to build it up and add/link resources. – caes (talk) 06:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


Nominated by Fandomgeographies on February 9, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Hesitant Yes: Is this the only use of this word in fandom? For actor ships? Because I could have sworn when I was active on r/asoiaf back in the day they used to use the term in connection to fan theories, like someone would would post a fan theory, and someone would respond with "lets put on our tin hats", or something of that variety. -- Kingstoken (talk) 16:42, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes I would like to see more examples for the second definition where people use this term to refer to "fans who deliberately ignore parts of a canon they dislike in order to continue enjoying the media, for example bad writing, questionable relationship choices, etc." or at lease some kind of source. WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Not Yet This is very specifically about celebrity tin-hatting, and while it's definitely a thing in RPF fandom, there's absolutely connotations for fandom tinhatting beyond just headcanons. Destiel tinhatters, for example, who are (or were) absolutely sure that TPTB will/would make Destiel canon. --Punkpixieprince (talk) 02:18, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Telephones and Fandom

Nominated by Fandomgeographies on February 9, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

I think the "Phones in Fanworks" section to be expanded to include more about how the ways in which phones are used or avoided, particularly in fanfic. I've added to Talk:Telephones and Fandom. – caes (talk) 01:07, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Hesitant Yes: I've separated Phones in Fanworks into a different page. This page is now primarily related to fan communication and doesn't have any glaring holes, although the ubiquity of smartphones and apps could still be expanded on. – caes (talk) 19:33, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes: I hesitate because it seems to feature two different topics, how fans used to use the phone to collaborate and contact each, and how phones are depicted in fanworks, and I am not sure if they merge so well -- Kingstoken (talk) 16:31, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes: I think quite a lot of fans nowadays use customized phone cases depicting fan art for their mobile devices and their fandoms, this is something I definitively would like see included there. Also maybe WhatsApp group as new channel for fannish connections? WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Lemon Chicken

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

Not yet, because although I'd be very interested to learn more about this SGA trope and see it featured, I... don't really understand this article, probably because I don't know anything about the fandom or Stargate Atlantis. What does the trope mean? An indication of angst-level, as the essay in the last section suggests? What kind of mistakes were made in the episode "Trinity" and why is that relevant to lemon chicken? How much is the term "lemon chicken" used to rate(describe? label?) fic, and is that related to fics where lemon chicken is "some kind of topic" or are they separate things? Also, what kind... of topic...? Some of these questions could probably be answered by clicking to a new page and reading that page, but that shouldn't be necessary for a featured article, I think. Also, there aren't any fanwork examples, and I think there should be. They would be particularly helpful if they came with annotations about how lemon chicken is used in the fic. (If lemon chicken is used in the fic? I'm not sure if the lemon chicken fic involves literal actual lemon chicken being eaten by characters or not.) - Hoopla (talk) 18:09, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Not Yet: I agree with Hoopla, if you are not from SGA fandom it would be every hard to understand what this article is about. I think it may be just a wording issue, I'm not sure, but I think the article would need to be improved, and maybe examples added showing the use of term -- Kingstoken (talk) 19:24, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Not yet: A very interesting phenomenon, but there are a couple of issues with the page as it stands. I had to click through to the page for the meta essay in order to understand exactly what "lemon chicken" was all about, and I added what I hope is a slightly clearer explanation (as I also don't know the fandom, or the canon, at all) to the intro to spell out why this trend is referred to as "lemon chicken". However, what's unclear is whether this term is actually a trope or just a rating system for fanworks. The page refers to it as a trope, but a trope is a motif that crops up within a fic, not something that is used to describe a fic. As I understand it, "lemon chicken" as referred to in the essay is symbolic of a certain trend in fanworks, which may or may not actually involve lemons, or lemon chicken.
However, it seems like literal lemon chicken does also crop up in many of these works - so "lemon chicken being served in the mess" is a trope, but "lemon chicken" is also used as a rating system for a specific type of fic (post-Trinity fic). The confusion comes from the fact that the page doesn't make it clear where one begins and the other ends, referring to the rating system as a "trope". I think "lemon chicken" as a rating system was coined in response to the "lemon chicken being served in the mess" trope, but that trope isn't always required for a fic to qualify as a "lemon chicken" fic. It may also be that the rating system caused more writers to feature lemon chicken in their works. But the rating system in itself encompasses things other than lemon chicken.
Tl;dr I think there is a lot of interesting stuff going on here, but the page needs a rewrite in order to focus less on the essay and more on the fic trend that it talks about, the hallmarks of a "lemon chicken" fic, and also how the trope of actual lemon chicken comes into things and is influenced by the rating system. -- enchantedsleeper (talk) 21:33, 03 March 2019 (UTC)

Sharing Deleted Fanworks

Nominated by Caessius on February 20, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Yes, a great page and very informative. I just read it straight through because it's that interesting! I updated the language around orphaning fanworks on AO3, because the page previously made it sound like AO3 and orphaning were still new, when they've been around for some time now. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 12:56, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes: -- Kingstoken (talk) 16:56, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes: Good page. I never knew Tumblr reblogs survived deletion!! --Auntags (talk) 18:20, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes. This page ended up sending me down a bit of a rabbit hole b/c I didn't know what Gafiating and Fanac meant, so it's a great page in a technical wiki sense as well as an information sense. Also I learned we have a Fannish Regrets page which made me chuckle, because mood. --Punkpixieprince (talk) 02:24, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes MPH (talk) MPH (talk) 23:24, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Bitter Old Fanfic Queen

Nominated by Caessius on March 1, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Not yet: Interesting topic, but there's relatively little to this page as it stands - just a brief description of the term and examples of its usage. It could do with some detail on how the term has spread and evolved, whether its usage is confined to a specific period or is still current, and whether it tends to be used more as a pejorative term (as the original essay would imply) or whether it has been reclaimed by those it was originally intended to insult. The original essay seems to tie it to a specific type of fan with a specific attitude towards the X-Files, but it appears to have become used more generally to refer to someone who has been in fandom for a long time. It would be useful to delve more into that and perhaps also how the term ties into more general issues surrounding age and fandom, since surely there's a strong link to be drawn there. -- enchantedsleeper (talk) 10:47, 04 March 2019 (UTC)

Not Yet: I agree with everything Enchantedsleeper said, it needs a little more meat before becoming a featured article, but it has definite potential -- Kingstoken (talk) 11:20, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Character Bashing

Nominated by Kingstoken (talk) on March 03, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Not Yet but I would love to see it featured! I think it needs more fan comments and that something about the history of the use of the term in fannish circles would be nice — the earliest I found was 2004, but the phrase "character bashing" was used in a new york times article in the late 90s so fannish usage could certainly have started at least that early. I also think that the notable examples section might benefit from being less of a straight up list and instead have small sections for some of the really notable/interesting examples, then a list of other examples at the end. Like, I think Jar Jar Binks, Wesley Crusher, Harry Potter character bashing in general, and maybe Mineta would all make interesting sub-sections of a couple paragraphs. I could definitely do the Mineta one to give people an example of what I'm thinking.
I also think that the way character bashing is used to further whump/woobies would make a good section? I found some comments on it! Which, yes, by the way, I added a linkspam of relevant meta and discussions on the talk page, but I don't have time to work them in anytime soon. - Hoopla (talk) 17:28, 7 March 2019 (UTC)


Nominated by Assassin_J on March 11, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Not Yet: The article has no fan con reports and no reactions from fans. The article has a good history of the event, but I think it needs more to become a feature article -- Kingstoken (talk) 09:09, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
You know what, that's true. Thanks, I will be on the lookout for more content like what you mentioned.--Assassin J (talk) 12:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


Nominated by Kingstoken (talk) on March 17, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Not Yet — I think it's a good idea to feature this fic, but I think the page could use a little more detail and more fan comments? Also, I found this rec on the first page of google results, a 2010 review with a long list of warnings that could give readers an idea of what exactly "it's dark" means. I also think we could use a longer explanation of premise (or maybe a plot synopsis?) and more negative comments. I also don't think most of the author's note is actually relevant to the page. Also, has discussion/people's impressions of this fic changed over the uhhh almost 20 years since it was published? Are other X-Men darkfic influenced by it? Was the fic in anyway a reaction to what was going on in the fandom or with the source material at the time? Like, ideally, I want to learn something new about the X-Men fandom or fandom in general in the 2000s from a featured article like this. - Hoopla (talk) 00:27, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

The GDP Series

Nominated by punkpixieprince on March 20, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Here's my pitch: This fic became a fandom juggernaut and popularized a lot of subtropes in Sentinels and Guides are Known fic and Sentinel AUs as a whole. It's thus part of the explanation for how Sentinel AU tropes look so different than actual Sentinel canon, which I think is an important thing to highlight. Also, the fic (and its discourse) is kind of wild, so it's fun to learn about. --Punkpixieprince (talk) 17:57, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes MPH (talk) MPH (talk) 23:22, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes -- Kingstoken (talk) 01:11, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Yescaes (talk) 02:33, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Almost - I think the primers should go with the external links and the "about the series" section should be expanded a little. Like, it looks like there are 45 stories online at the first primer link — but that's not all of them, right? Do we have a definitive count for how many there were or for how many have been taken down? Also, all the fan comments seem to be able the controversies and that section is GREAT but usually we have general comments, too. Maybe we could use more general comments (if they exist?) to beef up the "about the series" section. Also, the influence section could be much better. Does anyone have examples of other fics that have used those tropes laying around? Can anyone speak to how Sentinel fic was different before this series, if it was different? Also, all those redlinks for the vocab... if we can't make at least stub pages for them all really quick, then we should define them on the page, because I've never read a Sentinel AU so I have no idea what's going on. Also, maybe we could use Template:Annotated Fanwork on the inspired work and give more details about them, if we can't work them into the tropes section or something. Are any of them recursive? Finally, I wish there were more comments from the author on the page — the only one is hidden in the references, and that seems like a shame, although I know we maybe just can't find more quotes from her. (...also despite my laundry list of things that could be improved, this is such a great and interesting page!) - Hoopla (talk) 03:11, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
...Oh yeah, also, there's no dates in the infobox D: The author's 2016 comment says it was written "ten years ago" but there are comments from 1999, so...? - Hoopla (talk) 03:35, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


Nominated by Caessius on March 20, 2019. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags.

Yes: But it has a citation needed tag so that would need to be cleared first -- Kingstoken (talk) 01:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

✪ This article is part of Fanlore Featured Articles. You can find out more about these below.
How To & About About Featured ArticlesHow to Nominate
Past Featured Articles 201920182017
Featured Article Nominations 201920182017