Talk:Magic AU

Formatting

Is there any opposition to me editing the current example fanworks so that they utilize the Template:AnnotatedFanwork, thus including more information about the fanworks? I will then also include the following archival links:

• http://web.archive.org/web/20170115061825/https://www.dwiggie.com/derby/old_2008/kara8.htm
• http://web.archive.org/web/20170115062032/http://www.dwiggie.com/derby/old_2008/kara8b.htm
• http://web.archive.org/web/20170115062120/http://www.dwiggie.com/derby/old_2008/kara8c.htm
• http://web.archive.org/web/20170115062156/http://www.dwiggie.com/derby/old_2008/kara8d.htm
• http://archive.today/2013.06.20-130343/http://sgabigbang.talkoncorners.net/?view=fic&id=86
• http://archive.today/2012.11.30-051801/http://pampalini007.livejournal.com/625.html
• https://web.archive.org/web/20200315181927/https://rei-c.livejournal.com/1129657.html
• https://web.archive.org/web/20200315182343/https://rei-c.livejournal.com/1130350.html#cutid1
• http://archive.today/2020.03.15-184013/https://rei-c.livejournal.com/1131004.html%23cutid1
• http://archive.today/2012.11.28-053512/http://cybel.livejournal.com/43049.html
• http://web.archive.org/web/20140808183103/http://archiveofourown.org/works/713274?view_adult=true&view_full_work=true
• http://web.archive.org/web/20180216175650/http://archiveofourown.org/series/81856
• http://web.archive.org/web/20140902051851/https://archiveofourown.org/works/1324588?view_full_work=true
• http://web.archive.org/web/20161222173518/https://archiveofourown.org/works/8913325

Unfortunately LJ seems to think the images on the art posts are 18+ and I fear they won't be able to be archived. Archive.is is currently in the thousands as far as the queue goes, and WBM is just saying it's archiving pages, but it's not actually doing so, so I can't test. Does anyone know of another archiving site that might be able to bypass this censor? Thank you in advance, for any response! Jacksbrak (talk) 19:02, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm not a fan of the AnnotatedFanwork template on pages like this OR of including unnecessary archive links on fanwork examples. I think it makes the page look cluttered and sloppy. Also, authors' summaries and tags aren't usually what's important when providing examples on a Fanlore article. It's much more informative to add context and explain *why* the example is important/representative/interesting enough to be listed on the page at all. --sparc 19:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I agree with sparc completely, I also really dislike the AnnotatedFanwork template, like it is fine for a page with only a few key fanwork examples, but anything more than that looks really cluttered and makes the article 10x longer that it needs to be -- Kingstoken (talk) 20:46, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

As an alternative, could I suggest the table used here, Enemies to Lovers#Example Fanworks. I found this template on the Genderswap talk page, and I really like it. It also illustrates what sparc was saying, about notes providing context. --Auntags (talk) 10:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)