Fanlore:Featured Article Nominations/Archive (2021)

From Fanlore
Jump to: navigation, search

About this page

This page lists Featured Article nominations that were posted on the Fanlore main page in 2021 or that were rejected during 2021 due to insufficient yes votes. For current nominations, visit Fanlore: Featured Article Nominations.

Approved nominations

The Course of Honour

Nominated by error_cascade on November 30, 2020. As of writing the page has a good intro and looks reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags. I find it to be an interesting article on an original slash work that developed its own fandom. Covers a controversy around tag synning on AO3; Yuletide.

Yes -- Kingstoken (talk) 01:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes -- SecurityBreach (talk) 07:34, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes -- MPH (talk) 23:43, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes -- Emma M (talk) 17:19, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes: I made a few updates as parts of the page felt a little out of date as they were written in 2019, and tweaked a couple of the subheadings. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 12:54, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Nomination approved.

Spring Fling (podfic anthology)

Nominated by enchantedsleeper on January 2, 2021. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags. A significant podfic anthology that inspired the Pod Together challenge. The page features fan reactions, banners and seems well-fleshed-out. Plus, podfic!

Yes: This is a very interesting and informative page. I liked the fan reactions and comments in particular. --Auntags (talk) 23:01, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes -- SecurityBreach (talk) 23:07, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes -- Kingstoken (talk) 22:58, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes. --Emma M (talk) 20:36, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.


Nominated by Kingstoken on November 08, 2020. As of this writing, it has a good intro and and is pretty comprehensive with no content flags.

Maybe: For the length of the page and the breadth of the topic, I'd like the intro to be a little more fleshed out? Also there are criminally few fan comments, especially since the text preceding the comments says they're a love/hate thing in fandom and the three comments under it are all positive, which doesn't feel like a good representation of PPoV to me. - flyingthesky (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
In fairness, I added that text after Kingstoken nominated the page, and I would say that the three comments aren't all positive because the top comment's point is that they're almost never done well. But I agree with adding more fan comments if we can - I added the three AO3 comments as a starting point. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 21:38, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Swapping my vote to Yes with the changes. - flyingthesky (talk) 17:07, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes: We've now got a lot more fan comments on this page, and I also moved some text up from the Fan Comments section to flesh out the intro and address flyingthesky's other concern. I also built out the "More Information" section into a fuller list of communities and events, with wikilinks to some other crossover-related pages. And I made some changes to the subheadings which I think improves the layout of the page (hopefully others will agree!) --enchantedsleeper (talk) 15:25, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes: I like the additional information that has been added and this feels like a very fleshed out article now. Great additions enchantedsleeper! --Emma M (talk) 17:45, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes: Article is looking great now. --WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:37, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.


Nominated by Kingstoken on January 18, 2021. As of this writing, it has a good intro with no content flags.

Yes -- Error cascade (talk) 00:57, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes -- SecurityBreach (talk) 06:59, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes A great and informative page. --WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:37, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes: The page is well written and informative. --Mika Marguerite (talk) 15:27, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes--Auntags (talk) 11:59, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.

Buddy Cop Fandom

Nominated by Kingstoken on February 2, 2021. As of this writing, it has a good intro with no content flags.

I stumbled across this article and I thought it might be fun to feature, it does a good job of explaining what the fandom is and why it was popular for a long time -- Kingstoken (talk) 18:52, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes: A great idea for a feature, and I think it covers the topic well. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 20:27, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes: The article covers the topic well from what I saw and I like the number of examples given. --Emma M (talk) 20:44, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes --Auntags (talk) 21:16, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.

The Act of Creation Will Be Your Salvation

Nominated by Kingstoken on February 5, 2021. As of this writing, it has a good intro with no content flags.

Influential and highly recced fic in Steve/Tony fandom. I think it has been a quite awhile since we featured anything from the MCU -- Kingstoken (talk) 15:19, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes. This looks good to me and I like the variety of fan interactions shown: podfics, fan art, fanvids, and reviews. --Emma M (talk) 20:50, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes from me as well. It is an excellent fic - I actually didn't know quite how highly regarded it was. Good one to feature. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 23:40, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes I think the article would be interesting to feature and hit people in their guts with some angsty feels. Plus, the Fanwork examples are wonderful and I'm sure readers will enjoy them. --Mika Marguerite (talk) 17:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.


Nominated by SecurityBreach on January 28, 2021. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags. -- SecurityBreach (talk) 02:39, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Maybe: there is something about the intro paragraph I find confusing, as a new person that had never heard of this fandom before I'm still not sure quite what it is from that paragraph, although I'm not sure how to fix it. -- Kingstoken (talk) 15:19, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes: changing vote to yes after changes made to the introduction, it is much easier to comprehend for a newbie. Good work, guys! -- Kingstoken (talk) 20:29, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Maybe. I agree that the into paragraph feels a bit confusing. Having read the whole page I think it might help if a line from the Game Play section was added to the intro. Currently the intro says a lot about the naming convention of the game but doesn’t really give an idea of what the game actually is when playing it.--Emma M (talk) 17:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Good suggestion by Emma M - I added a bit to the intro based on the Gameplay section to give an idea of what the games involve. I also added some info on fan activities to the end to give a sense of how the fandom interacts with the game, and I removed some of the detail around naming conventions as that's not really needed in the intro (I added some of it to the History section so that it wasn't lost). --enchantedsleeper (talk) 19:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the edits enchantedsleeper. I think the intro works better now so I'm changing my vote to Yes. --Emma M (talk) 19:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes: I think this article is ready to feature with the reworked introduction. It's an interesting page! --enchantedsleeper (talk) 19:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes Thanks for all the work people put into this page. MPH (talk) 21:00, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.


Nominated by Kingstoken on January 25, 2021. As of this writing, it has a good intro with no content flags.

An alternative reality shown in season 5 of SPN that fans still create fanworks in. I think it has been not quite a year since we featured anything from SPN fandom -- Kingstoken (talk) 19:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Almost there: I know next to nothing about Supernatural, but I know I love canon alternative realities. Still, I feel there ought to be more fannish voices in the Fan Appeal section. - SecurityBreach (talk) 20:27, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Changing vote to yes after recent edits. Thank you! -- SecurityBreach (talk) 09:27, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
I been trying to find more fan comments, but it's hard, I know a few months ago there was a discussion in the supernatural thread of fail-fandomanon about why fans love the Endverse, but I was busy with other things and I forgot to bookmark it at the time, and now I can't find it again, although I have never been great with searching dreamwidth -- Kingstoken (talk) 22:12, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes: I felt like it needed an expanded intro, so I added a bit about the fan appeal of the episode to the intro, and added some bits to the Fandom section, as well as a couple of fanworks. I also added two comments from Tumblr and one from FFA, and I saw that Error cascade also added a comment. While I know there are always more comments to add, I feel like we have a good range now, and I think the article is well-fleshed-out in other respects. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 20:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes MPH (talk) 21:01, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes | Julie (talk) 12:02, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes --Emma M (talk) 13:53, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.

Yesterday Upon The Stair

Nominated by Kingstoken on February 15, 2021. As of this writing, it has a good intro with no content flags.

A well known fic in BNHA fandom. I stumbled across this article, and it looks really well filled out, I thought it might make a good featured article. Also I don't think we have featured anything in this fandom before -- Kingstoken (talk) 15:15, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes — Maybe I'm biased because I wrote a bunch of it, but I think it would be an excellent feature! - Hoopla (talk) 07:05, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes: YUTS is the most popular BNHA gen fanfic on AO3 and so far, the article does a good job of telling why. I also like how the article follows the PPOV and includes the negative reviews as well. Plus, I don't think we have featured an anime related article in a while, so that would be nice. --Mika Marguerite (talk) 07:48, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes: I'm not in this fandom but that article is very detailed. It would be nice to feature a fanfic for an anime. Patchlamb (talk) 01:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes: As someone who has read this particular fic I think the article is very good and considering its popularity I think worth featuring. I also appreciate that it includes both positive and negative reviews. --Emma M (talk) 13:59, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.

Multi Animator Project

Nominated by Patchlamb on Dec 20, 2020. As of writing the page has a good intro and looks reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags. I feel like I haven't seen many articles about video-based fanart featured or nominated, so I thought it would be nice to nominate one. "MAPs" reach a lot of different fandoms.

Hesitant Yes: I would love to see this page featured as it directly addresses the issue around the acronym MAP, and it highlights a type of collaborative fanwork that I'm unfamiliar with. I think the intro could be reworked a little bit - I had to reread it because I originally thought the first MAP was in 2019 because Cattrell's blogpost was referenced before the video. Also the name and host of the first MAP could be added to the intro. --Auntags (talk) 22:47, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Maybe: It feels a bit short on Fannish comments. Also the controvery about the term could maybe flashed out a bit/maybe a different term is currently in development? --WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:37, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Maybe: I'm not sure I like how some of intro is worded, like saying "self-explanatory", well it might not be "self-explanatory" to someone who has never heard about this before, and it also feels a bit jumbled to me. I think, if the problems with the intro could be fixed, it might be a good article to feature -- Kingstoken (talk) 23:22, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes: Changed vote to yes, after changes made to intro -- Kingstoken (talk) 00:08, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes: It looks like Patchlamb has been diligent in addressing the issues raised here, and the intro is much improved! I would have liked some more comments from fans beyond the ones we have on the MAP acronym controversy, but a quick search on Google and Dreamwidth didn't yield much, maybe because it's known mainly to specific corners of fandom and doesn't have a lot of wider awareness.
Auntags, WhatAreFrogs? and Kingstoken - any thoughts on the page as it is now? --enchantedsleeper (talk) 20:25, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
I think it is better, but I still didn't realize that all the participants involved where actually drawing the clips themselves, and not augmenting clips from canon material, I didn't realize that until I clicked on the AMV link which has a couple of lines referencing MAPs and what they are, I hope I'm not being dense, but it wasn't completely obvious to me -- Kingstoken (talk) 00:20, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
How about now? — PCCB 00:04, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Much better, thank you -- Kingstoken (talk) 00:08, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes: I only became familiar with the term when the controversy over it's new usage was all over my twitter timeline so I think with the new edits the page explains well what the term stands for and gives good examples. --Emma M (talk) 13:51, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes -- SecurityBreach (talk) 05:01, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.

No Man's Sky

Nominated by Patchlamb on February 17, 2021. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags. I think No Man's Sky has a pretty interesting community and history, and I felt it would be fun to nominate a video game fandom.

Yes: As someone who was interested in the game when it was announced but then never ended up playing it I had no idea the community behind No Man's Sky, which the article explains well. It seems like the game has a fandom that is very different from most in the sense that it is more based on communal play and categorizing than the traditional making fanfic and fan art, none of which I knew previously.
Yes -- Kingstoken (talk)
Yes -- Error cascade (talk) 03:24, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes -- The page does a good job of explaining the game's fannish history and is an interesting read. --Mika Marguerite (talk) 13:24, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes: I found this a very interesting read and it's great to feature a game-related page. I felt as though the intro needed a bit of expanding to more directly capture the game's appeal to fans, which I've just done. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 13:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.

How Much Is That Geisha In the Window?

Nominated by flyingthesky on 8 March 2021. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags.

admittedly, there's another firefly nomination up there but i thought this might be an interesting page to feature too, since it's a vid about the lack of Asian representation/racism in firefly and that's been a hot topic recently in fandom. plus it's been a while since we featured a vid. - flyingthesky (talk) 10:53, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes -- Kingstoken (talk) 10:56, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes -- Auntags (talk) 21:52, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes -- MPH (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes -- Error cascade (talk) 02:51, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes -- Erimia (talk) 07:38, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.

Sabine (fan)

Nominated by SecurityBreach on March 15, 2021. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is very comprehensive, with no content flags.

The page is a beautiful tribute to Sabine, a multifandom fan who passed away in 2013. --SecurityBreach (talk) 06:56, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes: Very much yes. MPH (talk) 13:56, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes: Although it would nice to change some of the red links to blue -- Kingstoken (talk) 15:25, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your vote! I did some work on the red links and made a few stubs. I'm not sure what to do about The Mango though. I looked hard on the internet but I fear this mailing list is gone forever :( --SecurityBreach (talk) 10:09, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes --Auntags (talk) 21:08, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes --WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 14:35, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.

The Loyal Opposition

Nominated by Erimia on March 4, 2021. As of this writing, it has a good intro with no content flags.

Not an easy read by any means but I think it's an important document of the Breen-Bradley sexual abuse scandal, as well as an insight into the attitudes and dynamics of the fandom of that time. -- Erimia (talk) 02:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes: I went through and added some wiki links for context. There is a typo I mentioned on the talk page (I'm curious as to whether it was a typo in the original zine - probably was). I also want to open the idea of a content warning for discussion? Child sexual abuse is a potentially triggering/upsetting topic to feature on the main page. Would a content warning banner help alleviate that? I know there's a bit of a generational gap with content warnings and that's never been addressed as a wiki policy, so... thoughts. -- Error cascade (talk) 06:31, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Not Yet: Do we have any information about The Great Breen Boondoggle? Because it seems very strange to feature a zine that is in response to another written document and not be able to click through and find out what that document said. Also, the contributors of this zine were very wrong and he did turn out to be a convicted child molester, this isn't mentioned on this page, but it seems like very relevant information. I also agree with Error cascade, if we do feature it I think that some sort of warning might be appropriate, because we are talking about real life, not fictional, abuse -- Kingstoken (talk) 10:30, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes: changing vote to yes based on the changes made to the article -- Kingstoken (talk) 23:11, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
I believe that the text is here. It is part of this main page. I could make a page on Fanlore for it. Or we could just link to it as an archived link. MPH (talk) 02:45, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes That's my vote for this page as a featured nomination. Though I do think that it needs a trigger warning. MPH (talk) 02:47, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes Altjough a sensitive topic, the page is a good one. Also agree on the content warning/warning to the social media peeps expecting flames when it is featured. --14:35, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
MPH has gone in and edited the introduction to the page based on thoughts that Doro offered to the Gardeners mailing list on how best to deal with this as a Featured Article; the intro is now much clearer up front about the subject of the zine and Breen's sex offence convictions. Could Error cascade and Kingstoken take a look again and add thoughts as to whether this is sufficient in terms of a warning about the article's content? We could also add an additional note at the end of the excerpt that gets featured on the front page reiterating that this page deals with sensitive topics and to use caution when clicking through.
MPH has also made a page for The Great Breen Boondoggle, Or All Berkeley Is Plunged Into War (thank you, MPH!) which should address the other part of Kingstoken's issues with the nomination.
I also think, although we agree that this article is important and worthy of being featured on Fanlore's front page, that we should not feature it on social media where it is often very difficult to give things their full and deserved context. That's more of a matter for the committee internally, but since WhatAreFrogs? referenced social media above I thought I would mention it here. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 13:03, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
The intro looks a lot better now in my opinion and clearly lets people know what is going to be discussed in the article now, I will be changing my vote to yes -- Kingstoken (talk) 23:11, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
I think the new intro adds sufficient warning and I'm willing to let my yes vote stand with just the revisions on the intro. However, in my last revision to the page, I added an italicized content warning at the top similar to general sort of disambiguation notices we regularly use on the wiki. If anyone objects and wants to remove or rephrase it, my yes vote still stands. But I don't think it detracts from the content and it also lets someone know at a glance what they're getting into by reading through the article. -- Error cascade (talk) 07:25, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes I think it's a very good article on a topic I knew nothing about. I also think that MPH's recent rephrasing of the intro (thank you very much!) is sufficient in terms of a warning about the article's content. --SecurityBreach (talk) 13:27, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.

The Theban Band

Nominated by WhatAreFrogs? on March 21, 2021. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags. Also, georgious art ;-) Stumbled over the page ny accident and remebered the artists back from the early 2000s.

Yes: Although I do wish the intro was worded a little differently, but I can't quite put my finger on how to change it -- Kingstoken (talk) 20:54, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
It's written in that breezy, sometimes puffery-ish, cliquey LJish way some articles (I'm looking at you, Stargate Atlantis) were during the very beginning of Fanlore. That's how it feels to me, anyway. MPH (talk) 18:28, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
I'd like to see the article's intro not focus on their gender and other personal details (and especially not lead off with a cite to a mainstream news media source). If others think that these things should be included, how about further down in another section and instead be validated by fan comments instead? MPH (talk) 15:51, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
I agree -- Kingstoken (talk) 16:59, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
I've had a go at rewriting the intro with these comments in mind, though feel free to edit it further. I tried to make it substantial without repeating too much of what is already said further down. At the moment the Bay Area Reporter article is only cited in the Visibility section, and there isn't any reference on the page to the creators' gender or nationality, though that can be added back in. I think it's fine to leave out, though. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 12:30, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you enchantedsleeper, the intro reads a lot better now, and I think would be great for a featured article -- Kingstoken (talk) 23:18, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes: I honestly didn't know about these two despite their fame, and the page was a fascinating read. Definitely Featured Article-worthy as I'm sure the feature will bring back quite a few memories, and it's a great snapshot of fandom in the mid-00s. --enchantedsleeper (talk) 12:34, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes: A very interesting read! --SecurityBreach (talk) 13:56, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes: Like others I hadn't heard of these two before and definitely think it would make for a nice featured article. --Emma M (talk) 15:37, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Nomination approved.

Rejected nominations


Nominated by WhatAreFrogs? on September 27, 2020. As of this writing, it has a good intro and no content flags.

There are a lot of articles about the Highlander fandom and the article is decent.
Hesitant yes: I think this would be a good featured article but the intro would need to be fleshed out before it can be featured. --Auntags (talk) 21:03, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Hesitant Yes: It seems like the article is twice covering canon details for the TV Series, once in the synopsis section and once again in the TV universe section, could we maybe combine these, and maybe tighten up the canon sections in general? Unless it is details that directly effect fandom and fanon -- Kingstoken (talk) 19:57, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
Rejected: It's been three months since the nomination, and the page still needs edits to address the concerns raised during the nominations process.


Nominated by error cascade on October 27, 2020. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags.

I found the article personally interesting and I think featuring something that could fall under the broad umbrella of Fandom on Reddit would be nice.

Hestitent Yes It seems the longest of our reddits articles, so why not, although it is really short for a featured article. --WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:35, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Maybe: I'm not sure because most of the article is about their anti-ship views, and more must have been discussed on subreddit than that, especially in the beginning, although perhaps I'm wrong, I'm not in this fandom, so I don't this subreddit's history -- Kingstoken (talk) 14:29, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Maybe: There's a recent post on the sub that's in support of S4 and most of the comments on it are positive to neutral. Another one also has a lot of discussion about S4 and some of it is negative, but apparently S6 is their new punching bag? Plus there's a couple of recent AMAs that should probably be highlighted. - flyingthesky (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Not yet: This issue is that Reddit is not a very shipping friendly space and fandom subreddits get completely different types of fans that you'd find on Tumblr. I do feel like this page is missing that POV. There's this rant and its comments which suggest folks on this subreddit were annoyed with the general direction of the show and departure from comics canon, and Olicity was at the centre of all that. I do like the idea of highlighting AMAs. We could also link to the episode discussions page, and r/arrow have a discord too. --Auntags (talk) 23:53, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Rejected: It's been three months since the nomination, and the page still needs edits to address the concerns raised during the nominations process.