Talk:None So Blind (Star Trek: TOS story by Brianna Falken)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The last review is now behind an F-locked journal. The owner of the journal has said that she would like to be deleted from this article. Do I just go ahead and do that? I have the email if anyone would like to see it. Bobdog54 (talk) 01:12, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- If it was unlocked at the time of quoting, Fanlore guidelines say we don't need to remove it unless there are identity protection issues. If there are identity protection issues, she should probably contact the wiki committee directly. If there are no identity protection issues, then it's a matter of editorial discretion. One time we removed a quote because the person no longer held the opinion quoted and we had found alternative quotes anyway. Part of what makes that quote valuable is that it's the only one from LiveJournal instead of a zine, though I don't know if we need the whole quote as given if that is its main purpose. (Actually the way the quotes are currently presented doesn't highlight who was reading it when and how. More context could be provided.) Did anyone else on LJ review the story? In general I don't like to encourage an automatically-delete-when-asked approach to Fanlore because it can interfere with getting an accurate picture of events, fandoms, etc.--aethel (talk) 02:40, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- I checked and the post was unlocked at the time it was quoted. But I agree we need more info from the author of the post. I personally prefer to quote more text of reviews, especially now that the page is locked because it helps give more context. We've had a few cases where we only quoted a snippet and then linked to the OP, only to find the author unhappy because they felt important context was missing. In this case I think your suggestion of highlighting at least the date and the platform would help trace the overall reception of the story - you can see how, over time, the mirror verse becomes less popular - starting around 2008 (as reported in the KS press) and this carries over to the new platform (LJ) into 2010. I did a Google search and did not find any further discussion about the story on LJ or DW - [edited to add] possibly a reflection of the stories reception? Interestingly enough by the time the story reaches tumblr it seems to be in vogue again. I can add a few more tumblr rec posts. [edited2: the reviews also reflect the shifting reception of the blind partner and severe hurt/comfort tropes] --MeeDee (talk) 03:40, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- Some information: from http://fanlore.org/wiki/Fanlore:Citation
- "If a post is initially public, but later deleted or made private, then screencaps of that material are fine to include as long as nothing in the screencap otherwise violates policy. The key here is the expectation of privacy at the time the initial post was made; if the post was originally open, there was no such expectation, and a retroactive friends-lock/removal doesn't change that. Care should be taken, as always, to present as many points of view on the issue as possible. Thus, if the screencap no longer represents the current position of the person represented, please take care to note their changed stance as well." --MPH (talk) 14:27, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- I am going to defer to your wise minds and the research that you have done. Once again, I learn. In cases like this, is the blogger (Victorian Lady) informed of Fanlore policy that keeps the quote in the article? Is there anything specific that I should do?Bobdog54 (talk) 16:03, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- The fan in question needs to contact the Fanlore committee themself, and they'll take it from there. --MPH (talk) 17:58, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- I just went to look at the quote to remind myself where we/I was in the proceedings and if I should contact the "owner" of the quote and the citation seems to have disappeared. I read everything over and checked to history;did I skip right over AVictorianGirl? Thanks Bobdog54 (talk) 20:31, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
- I am going to defer to your wise minds and the research that you have done. Once again, I learn. In cases like this, is the blogger (Victorian Lady) informed of Fanlore policy that keeps the quote in the article? Is there anything specific that I should do?Bobdog54 (talk) 16:03, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- I checked and the post was unlocked at the time it was quoted. But I agree we need more info from the author of the post. I personally prefer to quote more text of reviews, especially now that the page is locked because it helps give more context. We've had a few cases where we only quoted a snippet and then linked to the OP, only to find the author unhappy because they felt important context was missing. In this case I think your suggestion of highlighting at least the date and the platform would help trace the overall reception of the story - you can see how, over time, the mirror verse becomes less popular - starting around 2008 (as reported in the KS press) and this carries over to the new platform (LJ) into 2010. I did a Google search and did not find any further discussion about the story on LJ or DW - [edited to add] possibly a reflection of the stories reception? Interestingly enough by the time the story reaches tumblr it seems to be in vogue again. I can add a few more tumblr rec posts. [edited2: the reviews also reflect the shifting reception of the blind partner and severe hurt/comfort tropes] --MeeDee (talk) 03:40, 18 December 2015 (UTC)