Fanlore:Featured Article Nominations/Archive (2025)

About this page

This page lists Featured Article nominations that were posted on the Fanlore main page in 2025 or that were rejected during 2025 due to insufficient yes votes. For current nominations, visit Fanlore: Featured Article Nominations.

Approved nominations

Blank Space (Doctor Who vid)

Nominated by Kingstoken on December 20, 2024. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. I thought this fun Doctor Who vid might be a good feature.

Yes Kittycesario (talk) 18:36, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes Good choice. MPH 20:36, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes Agreed. Looks good. Rossi (talk) 02:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes This was fun! Cookies and chaos (talk) 16:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

.sig

Nominated by MPH on December 27, 2024. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. A bit of old-school culture.

Yes: -- Kingstoken (talk) 09:54, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes Good description of the ettiquette and examples Kittycesario (talk) 18:33, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes: Rossi (talk) 02:54, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes -- big big fan of pages like this which are approachable, concise, educational & interesting for featured articles Distracteddaydreamer (talk) 15:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Holmes/Watson

Nominated by Kingstoken on December 29, 2024. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. I thought this classic pairing might be a nice feature.

Yes Nice work on this page. MPH 20:35, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes Looks good! Rossi (talk) 04:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes Kittycesario (talk) 08:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes Cookies and chaos (talk) 16:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Manacled

Nominated by Kingstoken on January 2, 2025. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. This fic broke containment and became famous outside fandom, and i think the artilce is really well filled out.

Yes. Especially with the surge of interest again --Kittycesario (talk) 09:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes. MPH 20:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes --Auntags (talk) 22:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes -- FBV (talk) 17:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

I Am Groot

Nominated by FBV on January 8, 2025. As of writing, this page has a good intro and no content flags. Stumbled across this article and found it a good read. This fic was a bit of a sensation and the article is reasonable length and coverage of fandom responses.

Yes -- OfMonstersAndWerewolves (talk) 20:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes: -- Kingstoken (talk) 20:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes. --Mahikamihan (talk) 15:48, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes -- Kittycesario (talk) 19:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Fig Leaf

Nominated by MPH 00:02, 31 December 2024 (UTC). As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. Mainly because I find fig leaves humorous. MPH 00:02, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes: very fun artilce -- Kingstoken (talk) 00:56, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes - Amusing article with loads of examples, I think it's fun. Cookies and chaos (talk) 11:27, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes Kittycesario (talk) 12:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes - Lots of fun, lots of good examples. Greer Watson (talk) 21:50, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

The Other

Nominated by MPH 00:46, 17 January 2025 (UTC) As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. It's a long page about a complicated fandom. It's been a while since we've had a Star Wars topic. This one is fun due to all the wind-up, which ends with a fizzle.

Yes: fun artilce, I like to read who fans were speculating about -- Kingstoken (talk) 01:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes: it is fun to read about the opinions of fanon versus canon. GeoffA (talk) 13:29, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes: Looks good and is a fun little insight into SW fandom. Rossi (talk) 22:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes: Great page --Auntags (talk) 22:08, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

The Third Option

Nominated by Kingstoken on January 16, 2025. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. It has been about 8-9 months since we featured anything marvel related, so I thought this artilce might be a good choice.

Yes -- OfMonstersAndWerewolves (talk) 22:03, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes. MPH 23:38, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes. Rossi (talk) 03:36, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes RottKFan (talk) 10:50, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Forever Knight Wars

Nominated by MPH 23:46, 16 January 2025 (UTC). As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. A deeply detailed description of a unique fan activity in Forever Knight.

Yes Looks good to me. Rossi (talk) 03:38, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes Cesy (talk) 12:45, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes Unique and interesting. Alpha (talk) 17:59, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes SecurityBreach (talk) 04:31, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Highlander

Nominated by MPH 23:46, 16 January 2025 (UTC). As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. It's a long page about a complicated fandom. I'll find some more art for it.

Yes: there are a lot of red links in the artilce that I wish were filled in, but it is not deal breaker -- Kingstoken (talk) 01:09, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes: looks good here. Rossi (talk) 03:41, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes Cesy (talk) 12:45, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes SecurityBreach (talk) 04:33, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Tris/Alex

Nominated by MPH 01:07, 3 February 2025 (UTC). As of this writing, the page has a good intro. I know there's a lot of red links further down, but I don't think it subtracts too much from the page. The reason I nominated it is because it is very much a 1990's hair fandom lollapalooza of fannish imagination.

Yes: I think it would be a cool thing to feature -- Kingstoken (talk) 01:43, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes: It especially has some nice art pieces attached to it. Rossi (talk) 02:14, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes: SecurityBreach (talk) 06:07, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes: Wow, I learnt so much from this article, particularly regarding the conundrum about featuring pairings of real-life people versus fictional characters. GeoffA (talk) 06:14, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Merpeople

Nominated by MPH 00:14, 17 January 2025 (UTC). As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. It's a long page about a complicated fandom. Such a fun and lovely topic and trope.

Hesitant Yes: I do think a few items in the intro paragraph should be moved down into another section, like the MerMay challenge, the convention, and maybe also the cosplay. Also a common tropes section might be nice too, like what the common elements found in most Mermaid AU stories? Or what are the trends in fanart? -- Kingstoken (talk) 01:15, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

I moved the challenge, the con and the cosplay down and into their own sections. MPH 15:15, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes Rossi (talk) 02:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes SecurityBreach (talk) 04:38, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes GeoffA (talk) 06:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Dusttale

Nominated by Walker21232123 on December 7, 2024. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. A Undertale AU would be interesting to be a feature article.

Yes -- WhatAreFrogs? (talk) 20:38, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Hesitant Yes I put some suggestions on the talk page. https://fanlore.org/wiki/Talk:Dusttale Mrs. Potato Head 21:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Changing my vote to Yes MPH 01:19, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Nearly Good amount of content; however, I'm not familiar with the fandom and I feel that this page doesn't adequately explain the context or content of the AU for readers who are not already familiar with the fandom, and there are sections which need cleaning up/explaining. For example, I'm not sure what it refers to by the "takes" section, and the lede doesn't make it clear that there was originally a fanfic which inspired a fangame which then inspired the mass adoption of this AU in the fandom. - Castille (talk) 03:58, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Added some explanations to 'What is a Take' in the Undertale community and some other things like Modern AU Logic. Walker21232123 (talk) 11:10, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Maybe: it does to be a well filled out artilce, but I must admit as someone who does not know the fandom I found some of it a little confusing at times. If the intro could be made a little more newbie friendly I think it might be a good feature. -- Kingstoken (talk) 18:41, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Changing vote to Yes -- Kingstoken (talk) 17:55, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Maybe: I'm a little confused about whether this is a fanwork or a canon game? Rossi (talk) 02:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Nearly: I've done a bit of work on the history and created the fangame page as an internal linked page per the talk page suggestions. In addition to the remaining suggestions made, I think perhaps a few more fanfics (maybe some based on the original AU and some on the game? I don't know enough to find good examples of those easily though I'm afraid) Cookies and chaos (talk) 16:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Hesitant Yes I think it is important to feature material from around the world, and this page contributes to that knowledge. My only hesitation is, being unfamiliar with the fandom, I feel the introduction needs some cleaning up and expanding upon the canon and fanon. GeoffA (talk) 06:22, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Changing my vote to Yes based upon comments by Distracteddaydreamer GeoffA (talk) 10:32, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes I also did some rearranging. I agree with Cookie's comment about adding fanworks, and there definitely has to be more to say, but I think its okay to feature works in progress. After reading the article I get the feeling that I know what the universe / game is about and it is also great to feature a fandom and a work that clearly has a non-English speaking fanbase - it seems like a really interesting recursive fandom with a culture I'm not used to (differentiating "takes" and "spin offs" for example). personally would be willing to stick a content flag asking for examples on the fanworks section though, maybe one of the fans will see it and add on :P Distracteddaydreamer (talk) 16:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

The Beholder

Nominated by Rossi on February 16, 2025. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags. With the renewed interest in Dungeons & Dragons prompted by various live plays and podcasts, it seems like a good time to highlight a zine that was important to the fandom back in the day.

Yes: This fandom seems relatively overlooked these days, but it was so important and influential in its time. This zine clearly contributed to this phenomenon. GeoffA (talk) 06:10, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Hesitant Yes: interesting zine, I do wish the page had a little bit more about its place in D&D fandom, like was this zine popular or influential in some way? etc, but I do understand with older zine fandom that isn't always easy to parse -- Kingstoken (talk) 11:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

I tweaked the intro a little, added a bit about how the zines are viewed by the fandom. Rossi (talk) 16:53, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes: Fun! I added some wonderful YouTube reviews to most of the issues. But we need to fix those four red links in the intro. MPH 15:42, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

I've added stubs to replace the red links, and fixed a formatting snafu in various quotations where an external link broke. Rossi (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes. Agreeing with critiques above, but the article is good enough to feature as it is. —PictoChatCyberBully (talk) 2025-02-21 16:13 (UTC) 16:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Divine Intervention (album)

Nominated by Kingstoken on January 1, 2025. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. I stumbled across this artilce and I thought it might make an interesting feature.

Yes. I did a little light editing, and I'm voting yes. Nice choice. MPH 02:30, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes Nice piece of work. Rossi (talk) 03:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes SecurityBreach (talk) 04:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes Great to see filking getting acknowledged. GeoffA (talk) 06:30, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

2001: A Space Odyssey

Nominated by GeoffA on 21 February 2025. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags. Although it does not have an organised fandom, there can be no denying the impact the film has had on the science fiction genre and beyond. This page explores some of its themes, fan interactions and responses, and its positive and negative legacies. GeoffA (talk) 06:53, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Hesitant Yes: I do think it is a good artilce, but I think it needs a little reorganization, like all the quotes in the intro paragraph, I think I they should be moved in their own section -- Kingstoken (talk) 10:35, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you to Kingstoken for your work to reorganise the introductory material plus some other fan categories.GeoffA (talk) 11:27, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

You're welcome! And I'm changing my vote to Yes now -- Kingstoken (talk) 15:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes. —PictoChatCyberBully (talk) 2025-02-21 16:13 (UTC) 16:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes - HAL opens the pod bay door for this nomination. MPH 18:25, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, especially after recent edits. SecurityBreach (talk) 18:03, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Sherlock Holmes

Nominated by GeoffA on 18 February 2025. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags. I saw this was originally nominated about a year ago, and I have addressed the original concerns to the previous nomination: I cleaned up and expanded the introduction; and I added academic material regarding the fan response to Sherlock's death. I think it is worth featuring this page about the oldest form of modern fandom.

Yes: I nommed it last time, and I still think it's a great page, and it seems like most issues have been dealt with -- Kingstoken (talk) 10:59, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes and a hearty yes from me. Thank you to GeoffA and Kingstoken for all the work on the page. MPH 15:43, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks also to Ellakbhesse for her work too.GeoffA (talk) 21:23, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, GeoffA, for pointing that out. Thank you to Ellakbhesse. :-) MPH 01:17, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for remembering me and congratulations also to the other editors -- Ellakbhesse (talk) 17:00, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes. —PictoChatCyberBully (talk) 2025-02-21 16:13 (UTC) 16:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes: SecurityBreach (talk) 16:31, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

The Kiss in the Alley Debate

Nominated by MPH 22:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC) on February 19, 2025. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. It's a 1980/81 Starsky & Hutch fan theory that encompasses comments about Starsky/Hutch fiction at a time when there was only ONE S/H print zine available, highlights the very challenging communications in the fandom's only letterzine, illustrates the rise of the VCR and what it meant for viewing and control for all fans, and it has a focus of one of the fandom's most popular episodes.

Yes: I love old fan theories -- Kingstoken (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes: Wow, from the opening sentence, this sounds interesting. More than that, I am informed that modern S&H fandom contains a homophobic element today, so this topic should stimulate discussion. GeoffA (talk) 01:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes: Great article, enjoyed the read! SecurityBreach (talk) 19:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes: -- Sobqjmv sphinx (talk) 21:35, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Fobwatch Fic

Nominated by Kingstoken on February 18, 2025. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. This is a Doctor Who specific trope that I think would make an interesting feature. (I know we had a Doctor Who featured article recently, but I think if this one is approved there would be about three months between them)

Yes What an interesting page! MPH 01:07, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes. —PictoChatCyberBully (talk) 2025-02-21 16:13 (UTC) 16:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, A lot of good additions to this page. I completely forgot about the Rory theory! --Auntags (talk) 21:56, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes -- SecurityBreach (talk) 03:29, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

A Master of Magic

Nominated by Quaelegit on March 9, 2025. I'll be honest, I don't know if we can get this one up to FA standards. The lede is basically non-existent right now and I don't know if we can do the research to fill it out. However, if we can, I think it would be really cool to feature! Both for the unusual age of the fanfic and for the fellow-feeling and resonance it garnered response among present-day fans. -- Quaelegit (talk) 10:01, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes: I remember seeing this post going around tumblr and being delighted by it at the time. I have expanded the intro somewhat so it will be better for featuring -- Kingstoken (talk) 11:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Enthusiastic YES. I did some original research and found out a lot more about its context. I added it to the talk page, as well as the main page. Such a fun, fun delve into history. MPH 01:16, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the extra research MPH, it is really nice to have the added context -- Kingstoken (talk) 01:44, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

YES. Looks like a great article to feature. Alpha (talk) 18:28, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes SecurityBreach (talk) 12:52, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Diana Bennett

Nominated by Sobqjmv sphinx on 2025-04-01 06:24 (UTC). As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags.

Not Yet: I do think this page has potential, but the intro needs to be filled out a lot more before featuring, and, aside from all the lovely zine art, there doesn't appear to be a lot of fanwork examples, is this because of the controversy surrounding her character? Also a little more about the controversy itself I think is warranted, like we don't want to rehash everything from another artilce, but a little summary of the highlights might be good. Also, have people's opinions of the character changed since the series ended? Are they more sympathetic to her character now? -- Kingstoken (talk) 23:11, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Changing my vote to Yes, thank you to everyone that worked to improve this artilce -- Kingstoken (talk) 23:46, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm Sobqjmv sphinx add a ton of stuff last week. I also just scoured Tumblr, DA, and AO3 and added some newer fics and gifsets (no new art, alas). -- Quaelegit (talk) 12:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Made some revisions, starting with more fanwork examples and a bit of elaboration on controversy. I can't do much more with my limited knowledge of the fandom, but I hope it's improved. Sobqjmv sphinx (talk) 21:08, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Sobqjmv sphinx.

Yes I'm going to add more to this page and feel confident. MPH 23:14, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, but there's some repeat quotes above and below the fanworks section. Do we want to remove the duplicates? (Voting yes anyways mostly because I doubt anyone but me will read that far.) -- Quaelegit (talk) 12:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes -- SecurityBreach (talk) 12:20, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

SYOT

Nominated by Alpha on 2025-04-01 06:24 (UTC). As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags. It is an old and popular fan activity in the Hunger Games fandom which I think would be interesting to feature.

Yes - SecurityBreach (talk) 18:05, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes: -- Kingstoken (talk) 19:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes: -- MPH 02:31, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes : Almost: I'm a little confused by the lede reading

Leaving reviews is sometimes a requirement (or an influencing factor) to keep a character alive for longer as some authors prefer to write for people that is reading the story. Some even create interactive minigames to give their tributes a boost or items that help them survive.

followed by

They are not role-playing games, as once the characters are created and submitted, all decisions about their fate rest with the person writing the story. This distinction is important to clarify, as allowing readers to influence the story could categorize it as interactive fan fiction, which is against the rules of ff.net.

later, which seems to contradict itself? -- OfMonstersAndWerewolves (talk) 19:55, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Having read the controversies section, I can understand it a bit better myself, but I think it needs to be better explained in the lede. -- OfMonstersAndWerewolves (talk) 20:02, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, this was some confusing phrasing. I adressed it. Alpha (talk) 18:29, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Changed my vote to yes after changes -- OfMonstersAndWerewolves (talk) 22:03, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Victorian AU

Nominated by Kingstoken on March 1, 2025. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and no content flags. I thought this might be a fun trope/genre to feature.

Yes More examples to the gallery would be nice but it's good as it is. Alpha (talk) 22:07, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Added two recent examples from Tumblr. I'm happy to go looking through Tumblr, DA, Pixiv, etc. for more examples in teh 2012~2022 era, though probably in a few days. -- Quaelegit (talk) 12:13, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes MPH 23:29, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes SecurityBreach (talk) 12:36, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes Erimia (talk) 17:18, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Nomination approved.

Nominations on hold

David Gerrold

Nominated by Sobqjmv sphinx on 18 March 2025. As of this writing, the page has a good intro and is reasonably comprehensive, with no content flags. (Yes, I know I keep nomming pages, and they aren't ones I've worked on.)

Not yet - There are two critical issues with this article. Flatly, I find this an extremely confusing article, as someone who's familiarity with Star Trek only goes as deep as 'general osimosis from wider pop culture'. It mostly consists of quotes with little synthesis, paired with a disheveled article structure. Furthermore, the article is editorialized in a manner that rails against the subject and I am not comfortable featuring an article on a person (especially someone who is still living) that includes such editorialization. We don't have to downplay Gerrold's controversies, but we shouldn't play them up either. Pinky G Rocket (talk) 01:25, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Not Yet: the intro would have to be beefed up significantly, it is only a short little line currently. Plus, all the points Pinky mentioned -- Kingstoken (talk) 01:36, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Admin Note: Pause: Hi all, here with Fanlore Admin hat on: we previously have been hesitant to feature pages about living fans for a variety of reasons, so the committee is going to put a pause on this nomination for now. To make things more clear, we'll update Fanlore:Featured Articles to formalize this guideline. Sorry about the lack of clarity on this previously, and thanks for all the great work editing as usual. -- FBV (talk) 22:15, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Nomination placed on hold.