Talk:Stargate Atlantis Season 2

From Fanlore
Jump to navigation Jump to search

From the Fanlore Committee -

It has become clear that a number of topics discussed in this page earlier were reaching impasses. Consensus can be tricky, and discussion is a healthy thing we welcome, but 30,000 words in two days is enough to give anyone the desire to put the whole of SGA in the corner for a time out on meta. Sure, in these early stages of the wiki it is going to be difficult reaching consensus on things, and that is okay.

We thus have archived the discussion that occurred between 6-10 October, and are officially closing it (archive links below). Which means that no matter which tricky issues and practices got discussed here before, they are not an appropriate topic anymore. Instead we'd like you to direct your energy to the page itself! Discussing actual page-content issues here like you were doing in the past... 2 hours.

A lot of different perspectives and approaches have come to light in this discussion, and in accordance with PPOV (which we really encourage you read closely if you're going to be tackling these kinds of issues), we believe that all of them have a place on Fanlore. Ultimately, beyond that the work involved is a matter of making them coincide as harmoniously as possible. The wiki will always be in-progress, it is not necessary to decide what we want it to ultimately look like before we even begin.

The first step towards that is providing those different viewpoints in the first place. So go ahead and add that material, and as you go we'll be keeping an eye out to tweak, shuffle, link and mark as what needs citation where necessary.

Please note also that as a result of this situation, we're going to be working on further development of our guidelines and policies on adding and editing content, as well as developing policies for conduct and content on Discussion pages across the wiki.

--Hope, anatsuno, Betty, Kai, Melina & rache 03:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


Archived Discussions:


The discussion that occurred here between 6-10 October 2008 has been archived.

Race discussion

Er, I hope I'm putting this comment in the right place. I've seen in the discussion below mention that the racism discussion was a "trend" 2007 but not 2006. I agree that it gained momentum over time, but for my SGA fandom experience it was quite important in 2006, including the Ford and Ronon discussions. I linked a 2007 reference because that looked back and summarized the objections, but for example even as a rather squee oriented fan, I had discussions in 2006 about the way "Pegaus natives" are depicted in some SGA canon and fanfic and as an outgrowth of these discussions I started my thematic list for fic featuring Pegasus cultures in August 2006. I don't really post in-depth meta much, so my reaction to these discussions was in making a fanfic link list, but the impetus was in part the fandom's meta (I just have a harder time finding links again outside my own LJ *g*), though I made the race-discussion aspect more explicit in meta posts from 2007 discussing my rationale for maintaining that thematic list. I also posted about how Ford is treated in some McShep fic in 2006 which iirc also segued into racism discussions elsewhere (post in my LJ from 16 Aug 2006) for example, and my post was in reaction to other meta posts about Ford as well. So I don't agree that it doesn't belong into the 2006 fanworks trend section if we indeed organize by year.--Ratcreature 08:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I am not in the SGA fandom, so the following is the opinion of an outsider: Would it be more suitable have the page about race & SGA somewhere like "Stargate Atlantis/Race" or "Stargate Atlantis/Controversy/Race" - or even just "Stargate Atlantis/Controversy" (which the race issue would definitely dominate, but I think that would be okay).
Remember that articles wikis are by nature inextricably interlinked, I would expect the Trends pages to say things like "this theme in fanfiction was heavily influenced by heated discussions on race underway in the fandom".
(Similarly with Seperis' comments below as to the risks of perpetuating a narrow point of view by suggesting that the fandom is organised in "trends" - you're more than welcome to create a subpage about genderswap meta in SGA fandom and simply link back and forth between "trends" and "genderswap meta" where necessary, for example. The Trends pages then present the POV that the fandom is arranged that way, and the meta or controversy pages present an alternate viewpoint on how it's all organised. Yay PPOV!) --Hope 08:59, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
I think my problem is that I don't really see the need yet for all these subpagesy yet, and I wouldn't dare to create one for say "race controversy in SGA" because I wouldn't feel qualified to give an overview ov how the discussions flowed. I could give a link to the post I think kicked it into high gear in 2007, but that's aobut it. And I have no idea even which sections would grow large enough to warrant a full subpage. I mean, why do we have to structure it before we even the content that seems likely to grow? The section in the main article about SGA fandom is still really small, and doesn't say much, except mention a couple of stories and communities. Why couldn't we just start with encouraging stuff to that section, and then once something got too long it gets a subpage afterwards. Right now I don't know whether something is supposed to go on a subpage or whether I can just add say a paragraph to the SGA fandom on the main page and say, that the a large John/Teyla maling list was created by such and such in 2004 or whatever. --Ratcreature 10:19, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


Moving Day!

And as I am back, my plan is to move this page to Stargate Atlantis/Fandom/Season 2. I will wait a day or so for any feedback, and then move it to the new location. Feel free to start Stargate Atlantis/Fandom/Season 1 etc in the meantime. --rache 00:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I would resist this move, though it's not a hill I'm willing to die on. But if you do move to Season 2, can you provide the dates? I've been adding stories and events based on the 2006 date, but I think the wonkiness of the SGA schedule (its split, right? July - Fall, then Jan-March?) makes it harder, not to mention that the season hit different countries at different time. So I think all in all it would make it harder to map global fan response onto a national television season, but correct dates will be essential! --Speranza 01:23, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Sure, I'll put in a link to wikipedia's episode guide and the general dates at the top of the page after the move. Other people then can customize it, so if I screw up the stuff for Europe, it can be changed. --rache 01:44, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Rache, I'd prefer to have it at Stargate Atlantis/Season 2, because technically the whole SGA set of pages are already ABOUT fandom. Like, technically a more accurate name for the *parent* page would be "Stargate Atlantis Fandom" (but I don't think that would catch on, heh). I am worried that by setting up a subsection for "fandom" we're inferring that the rest should be canon (or that there's a space for canon at all). --Hope 02:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
No problem. My only thought is that if there was one of these per year, it should have an overview page, but if all of the other pages are fandom overview, I just think we need to do a better job of integrating that.--rache 02:56, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

John Sheppard section

Do you think this should be rolled over into the gen section? I think the gen writers tended to focus more on John Sheppard's characterization, life and times, and his role on Atlantis than Sheppard/McKay, which tended to focus on either the relationship or Rodney. I could be wrong here; the reason I read gen was to get a clearer picture of John Sheppard himself, his role in the military and his role as a commander with less emphasis on him in relation to Rodney--so it's likely I missed some strongly John-centric Sheppard/McKay fics. --Seperis 20:40, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm in favor of deleting this section, and doing the character-related stories on the character pages, since they need more fandom content. I think you can go to town there with ever single John-centered story, including the 'psychotic killer or pretty, pretty princess' discussion-via-fanfiction, without regard to season or year produced. I think all of the character pages should have something like that, and I'm not sure it should be duplicated here. Just go ahead and organize it as you want, and we can sort it out through group edits over time. --rache 20:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Removed the John section and shifted it to the gen. --Seperis 21:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Did the trope of John as mentally unstable and/or seriously violent start in season 2? I mean, Rivier's Exigencies is from July 1st, 2005, so not quite S2 but just before, but I think it started the genre that blossomed from there. Like that Shark trilogy by magus_minor with the sequel Shiver by Ellex, those were S2 fic as well, iirc. However it might have started earlier? --Ratcreature 21:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I want to say that started with The Eye/The Storm. Cesperanza's MVP carried the trope as well of him being mentally unstable, though I'm uncertain if her intention was to portray him as himself or through the lens of Rodney's particular view of him. I want to say there was more meta on the supposed sociopathic tendencies than there was actual fic, but I spent a lot of 2006 refusing to read anything that wasn't recced to me by Ami or Madelyn to avoid hitting those characterizations, so I'm possibly the worst judge for that as far as Sheppard/McKay is concerned. That particular characterization didn't, to my knowledge, infect gen stories, but again, for my John reading, I stuck to the gen side of the force whenever possible. --Seperis 21:08, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Exigencies is gen though. It even won a gen darkfic award. --Ratcreature 21:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
I want to say that was a 2005 fic, though, not 2006. Not that it's not an example of gen with that tendency. There is a slash one by--possibly sardonicallysmiles? Maybe?--with a very similar theme, but I never read it, just heard about it. Maybe. --Seperis 21:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
I thought we were sorting by season now? But yeah, it was posted towards the end of the season 1 hiatus (1 July 05), but I didn't look so closely on that because the moderator said the John stuff had to go onto his character page not the season pages? I mostly meant that this wasn't just a McShep trend, since one of the most prominent, early examples, that gets recced every time someone asks for this, is gen. The slash one by sardonicsmiley you mention is from Nov 2007: http://sardonicsmiley.livejournal.com/33676.html --Ratcreature 22:08, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
...I'm actually not sure how this is going to sort out now. I thought it was moving, but there were some thoughts about leaving it as-is, so your guess is as good as mine. Season-wise, it would work as one of the first fics that I know of that covered that particular characterization, which needs to be recorded. --Seperis 22:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
I thought a lot of the psycho!John stuff came from The Storm/The Eye? Because he *gasp* killed people! He must be a psycho! Also (unrelatedly) is there a reason it's divided into slash/*ship*/gen rather than slash/het/gen? I know some people use ship to mean only het, but I didn't think that was the common usage in SGA. --Kyuuketsukirui 21:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
That was new to me too--I mean, not the concept, because that's how Wraithbait categorizes, so I'd seen it before--but I hadn't known it had shifted to general use either. --Seperis 21:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh, now that you mention it, I guess do remember seeing it on Wraithbait, but when I've posted het on SGA LJ comms, they've all used het in the userinfo rather than ship. I lean towards using het just for clarity's sake, since I think it's the more common term overall, and just less confusing (since ship and shipper are used within slash fandom as well). Even if someone normally uses ship in their section of fandom, het is a transparent term, whereas the opposite isn't true. --Kyuuketsukirui 21:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Seeing it in Wraithbait I'm used to, but not so much in the wild. Het, at least to me, is far more unambiguous and doesn't create an artificial split in use of the word shipping, since in my experience, it's generally used no matter the sexuality of the pairing. --Seperis 21:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

slash section

does the 71% refer to the stories currently in the archive for the ratio of total slash to John/Rodney or has anyone actually counted those uploaded during season 2? The text kind of implies the latter, but I can't figure out an easy way to limit display of stories to date ranges in the archive, so I think that needs more reference than just the archive itself as link. --Ratcreature 05:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Chronology

I'm wondering how to fit the challenges in. Are we setting the bar as they started either during season two or during hiatus, or that they *ended* in season two or season two hiatus? I'm thinking of Mensaverse and Bates and the Rodney het challenge or heck, the cyclical challenges altogether or the one-times. --Seperis 06:44, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

When I've been writing about challenges I've usually been using the dates they went live rather than sign-up dates. But if there are challenges that were sparked by a specific piece of canon then it would make more sense to put them in the season that prompted them... --Kyuuketsukirui 09:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Statistics in Slash Section

I think Icarus originally came up with the stats, and I'm sure it's in her methodology section in her original post. I haven't gone back to pick it up and put that information in; I guess I'd kinda been hoping that someone else would do that. --rache 15:36, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

The section doesn't say that the number comes from that essay. Also, I've just now looked at the LJ entry again, and that explains nowhere this 71% number. That LJ entry [1] just says "(according to Wraithbait, 71% of all slash stories are McShep)" so presumably that means of the total number posted up to then (presumably the postingdate of the essay? it doesn't clarify that either) rather than just ones posted during a period, because afaik Wraitbait doesn't allow for date range display. Also it doesn't explain which ratio of numbers that exactly is from the pairing labels.--Ratcreature 15:44, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Huh. So then the answer is no, we don't know where those number come from. You want to delete the specifics and make it more general text? Something like "More McShep stories are posted than any other pairing?" --rache 15:48, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
The thing is, if I go to Wraithbait today and do the most obvious ratio (ignoring the "bitextual", "threesome" and "crossover" categories and so on) and just divide the Mcshep/all slash stories numbers from their categories listing, then I get for all slash stories a ratio 72.5% Mcshep, so I can guess that that number Icarus did back then and got 71% for the stories posted in total to Wraithbait, but the section makes it sound as if there was a specific date range to the number, i.e. during season two (with the "continued to dominate the slash fandom, with 71%" phrasing). I think if that number was to stay to illustrate overall Mcshep dominance in slash fandom, it ought to come with a date when wraithbait was accessed and which category counts were divided, and make clear that it talk sabout the total number of stories posted to that archive up to that date, which maybe has been fairly steady ratio in fandom, but without wayback machine comparisons or something, I couldn't really say for sure. I just find it a bit weird to have this one random ratio without further explantion, just to have statistics somewhere.--Ratcreature 16:09, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
You're right, that does seem weird. I went in and added something like: (approximately 70% of the stories posted to wraithbait are slash, given this number of stories on this date) and set it up as a footnote. Feel free to fix the text --rache 16:16, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, except it is not about 70% slash of the total stories, but McShep/slash stories. The slash/total ratio is more like 55%. Assuming the date was now, if I look at Wraithbait there 7548 stories in total as per the number on the main page. Those are split into the toplevel categories "general" (1844), "ship pairings"(1179), "slash pairings"(4123), "bitextual"(154), "threesomes and moresomes"(229) and "crossovers" (364), however some stories must be listed in more than one toplevel category or maybe there are other counting details (maybe with the way series are counted), because as you can see from the numbers, if I add the numbers of the toplevel category listing I'd get 7893 stories in total. So if I picked *that* total, that I get by the sum of the parts it would only be 52% slash stories at Wraithbait for example. Then if I go into the slash story category itself it lists 2991 as McShep and numbers for all kinds of other pairings including a category for others and multiple, however still if I add up those individual categories (I'm not going to transcribe these) I get to a total sum of 4224 slash stories, so again a few must be listed in more than once to account for the slight difference, or maybe some of the bitextual ones that aren't listed in the "slash pairings only" total are listed under their specific pairings...
But I agree that a phrasing of "slightly over 70% of all the slash stories at Wraithbait" with a date, would be better than what is there now.--Ratcreature 16:57, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Could we move Freedom?

This page is a mess. I don't even know if I want to get involved in this. /o\ Anyway, could we move the part about Freedom's Just Another Word For Nothing Left To Lose completely to the fanwork page? Right now the trends page says more about the story than the fanwork page and I don't think that's the way it's supposed to be. We could then add a line to the "Gen Trends" section that the most popular story of the year straddled the line between gen and slash and won a gen award although the author intended it as slash. I would put it right after 2006 also saw some of the most powerful gen stories in the fandom being produced. What do you think? --Doro 16:00, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan! I know the page is a mess, and it needs help, so please go for it. --rache 16:04, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I have taken a stab at it. I think it cleaned things up somewhat. --rache 16:36, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
You were faster, yay! I changed the beginning of Gen Trends a bit to focus more on the trend part, removed one citation (anyone doubting that Freedom was the most popular story can read the citation on the Freedom page), and tried to even out the different POVs with regard to these stories. Now excuse me while I breathe heavily into a paper bag. --Doro 19:22, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Still thinking about Gen Trends

Domenika Marzione is mentioned as an author who focuses primarily on the military side of Atlantis. I guess the trend aspect would be that this goes against the trend? If so, that should be pointed out in the text, and maybe we could use a different example of her military fiction because the Runner story would fit perfectly on the Runner page, which still needs more fandom.--Doro 21:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I think you should go ahead and do it. I think the military story trend of season two was a kind-of reaction to the trend in season one of writing primarily about the scientists, so yeah, it's the trend that goes against a pre-existing trend. --rache 21:39, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I will. As soon as I've head some sleep. :) --Doro 22:07, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Concerning the difference between the Year 2006 and Season 2 throughout the world

I realise this page was originally the Year in SGA 2006 page, but I see two major problems that remain right now:

  • Some people's S2 occurred much later than 2006 through no fault of their own *g* (just for example, the Japanese DVDs for S2 went on sale in March 2008).
Correct. This page covers from July 15, 2005 thru July 14, 2006, which is roughly analogous to the initial release of season 2, plus the associated hiatus. If you can think of a better way to put that, awesome! It's always been problematic. --rache 18:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Marginalization of non-North American 'season 2' fanfiction

  • Season 2 related fanworks not written or made in 2006 are marginalised or not included in the Trends and Reaction Fic categories. This relates directly to the above point: the example stories given (those that I checked that had post dates) seem to be all written in 2006. And I suspect some people besides myself may be leery of adding later-written S2 content (a brilliant Trinity fic written in 2008, say) because it is unclear whether that is acceptable here or not.
    • This brings up the minor problem of all those fics set 'In Season 2'; i.e., not episode-related. Where ought they to be classified?
My feeling is that anything written between July 15, 2005 thru July 14, 2006 is covered on this page, whether they are episode related or not. To that same end, anything written during 2008 would be excluded as it's not in the listed date range. --rache 18:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

How does the date range work?

I am assuming that the reason the Slash/Ship/Gen Trends section contains only Y2006 fic is that these are new trends first observed concurrent with the US/Canadian SGA S2 airdates. So by its very nature this section:

  • excludes any fic not written during that period (not a problem, so long as that is clarified and later-written fic has a place where it can be included *points down*)
  • includes fic that does not take place during canon S2. Freedom's Just..., for example, is a futurefic.... (also not a problem; am again attempting to clarify)
Exactly. The focus of the page is when the story was written, that it falls within the more general 'season 2' initial release timeline, rather than the story tied specifically to the season itself. --rache 18:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

The Episodic Reaction Fic section, on the other hand, is perfectly fine!... provided that it is made clear whether fics not written in 2006 can be added (such as the hypothetical 2008 Trinity fic). A catch-all 'Set in Generic S2' section would also be nice.

My understanding is that no, if it wasn't written in the initial release timeline, it wouldn't be on this page. --rache 18:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Remix Culture might be better as a subsection of 'Fan Trends Concurrent with US/Canadian SGA S2 Airing Dates'. This would also be a great place to add in challenges that took place during the US/Canadian SGA S2 airdates.

Yes, that's might be a better title for this, if we can think of something less wordy. The page is currently trends that some fans saw from fan fiction posted during the initial release of season 2 in north america. Any sort of tend/theme/challenge would be covered by that, as long as it occurred during that timeline. --rache 18:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I know I'm being a pain in the ass. And I hope this hasn't been brought up and all hashed out before, but! Without more clarity about how this page works, I'm afraid to edit it at all....

No worries! This is a bugbear of a page, and no one can quite agree on what it's supposed to be or how it's supposed to work. All of my answers, for example, are strictly my own, and don't reflect anything official. So if you have thoughts on how you think it should work, just go ahead and edit the page, and we'll eventually reach some sort of consensus. Now that consensus may be that we don't really want this page at all, and we want to break everything out and do it all differently, and I am good with that. We aren't stuck with this structure simply because it was the V2 release. --rache 18:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

What say we do the bold yet insane thing of trying to make a template for all SGA season pages? Because there is no sense in reinventing the wheel each season *pours everyone a cup of tea*. I have tried to be inclusive, as you will note! I am very much prejudiced, having joined the fandom late and living abroad.... I do hate to shut the door on those who are coming late to the party, and believe firmly that even present-day fic can give insight on former seasons (a 2008-written S2-set Michael/Sheppard fic, for example, would be fascinating). My comments are in <note>s. I am not a good user of the Wiki-style: anyone who can make this pretty, I will hug.

ETA: and botheration, the Contents have (natch!) merged with the discuss!page!contents. Um. The stuff below is from Contents#11, at least until I figure out how to isolate this. *swears*

( Page example moved to Talk:Stargate Atlantis/Season 2/Season Page to give a clearer idea of how a season page would look, as well as make this page easier to read and clear up the table of contents listing. --Arduinna 09:53, 25 December 2008 (UTC))

I'm sure I'm missing many things, my mind being what it is, but... it seems that the other season pages are waiting in the wings for 2006/S2 to get its head clear, and having a template might be a way to ease that stagefright. Maybe? busaikko 11:49, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, anything that gets this page moving again is all right by me, but I do think that part of the issue was that there was a major change in direction from 2006 to Season 2. The original designation was charting what the FANS were doing chronologically by year, and presumed that as later fans came in (and, say, saw Season 2 on DVD or in repeats) they might make different fanworks, so a Season2-inspired story written in 2009 might be a different beast representing different fandom waves. The NEW designation organizes stuff based on what in canon responds to, and so, a big 2009 story or new kerfuffle dealing with Trinity that represents a fannish shift could just be added to the Season 2 page whenever it happens. I liked the original, sort of almanac approach, which is how this whole mess got started in the first place, but I do think that organizing stuff by season (meaning, fanworks that RESPOND to things in canon seasons) is more comprehensible for most people and more likely to encourage people to add stuff, which is what we want! Moreover, it's more obvious to most people WHEN a story is set as opposed to when it was WRITTEN, since lots of people don't date their stories, etc, so its probably a good choice there too. Anyway, babbling, but wanted to say, sure, let's do a template and get all 5 seasons up there, and then at least we have some hope of getting some kind of coherent structure. --Speranza 12:18, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Aaaand even as I look at the page, I see what a bear it's going to be to revise, becuase this is NOT Season 2 artworks at all; this is SGA fandom in 2006. So maybe I disagree with myself in a violently psychotic way and think we ought to go back to 2006, 2007, 2008. It would be a real shame to lose the history and make it, whatever, a list of episode tags. However, Busaikko's template is a terrific hedge, with that "Fanfic writing trends that emerged during the NA-airdates": way to have it both ways if we must stay with Season 2. --Speranza 12:25, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
*g* Hence my librarian!genes got to wanting a template, in the way someone drowning wants a life-preserver. I was attempting to fencesit with the template, have a place for North American Season 2 *as well as* reflect the state of fandom re works *taking place* in S2. And Yea Verily the template is as clunky as my old orthopedic shoes, but! The main problem with 2006 VS S2 is that for many people 2006=/=S2 (as I mentioned above, where I am, S2=March 2008, so if I got S2 and wrote the world's best Trinity story... it would NOT be eligible for the page **as it is now**. Not being written in 2006. It would be shunted to 2008, where the ZOMG S4 cliffhanger! would be primary... *time travel: not just science fiction anymore!*). busaikko 12:50, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
And perhaps there ought to be a timeline 'SGA fandom in Y2004/5/6/7/8', with seminal things like fic, cons, vids, etc., separate from the Seasons pages? busaikko 12:50, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
And *is not bold* oughtn't there to be some kind of consensus re a template before I go flinging such a thing up? ... and how does one create the sexy little boxes up at the top right? busaikko 12:50, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I love your librarian genes. *g* It's just really hard, because we have fannish wave theory conflicting with a canon-season model, and I don't know which looks more inviting to new fans: I mean, 2006, 2007, 2008 lets the fandom continue into the future, but the Season model gives us five seasons total, you know? That being said, I think that the Season template, as you wrote it, is really smart, and would allow us to have the best of both worlds for a while if we emphasize BOTH fannish works and trends that happened "as" the season premiered worldwide as WELL as specifically Season-2ish fanworks (we could also add a sixth page-SGA: Post-cancellation and then break whatever shows up there out into their own pages if/when it ever makes sense to do so.) Thing is, I don't know how much consensus we're going to get on xmas, and I'm not great at templates, though I assume the templates could be added to/adjusted depending on the season: it's an enabling constraint, right? I mean, I think its awesome and would encourage you to go for it; it's a wiki, it can be redone, and also--seriously, pretty much anything's an improvement, no?--Speranza 16:17, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
I have a radical suggestion: have season pages and year pages, both. I've never quite understood why the emphasis has been on getting it all onto one catch-all page, since seasons span more than one year (especially considering showings in different countries), and there will be more years than seasons. So a season page can be about fan reaction to a given season, whenever that reaction happens to occur, and influenced by all sorts of things (you could also have re-interpretations of a season based on events in later seasons). And the year page can be the fandom as it stands in a given year, regardless of what seasons are airing that year, which would allow for the inclusion of things like challenges or archives that start up in a given year but that have nothing to do with a given season. It would also allow for talking about how the fandom changes or doesn't change between seasons, as the seasons change. If there's overlap in what gets discussed on different pages, so what?
I would hold off on the infobox template idea for the moment, though; I'm not sure that individual fandoms are supposed to be getting specific templates made for them, at least not yet. (The wiki committee's list of things-to-do includes sorting out which templates can be created, and how to do so, so hopefully that'll be sorted out sometime soon. Who knows, maybe we'll wind up with generic season templates.) (Um. I am not really here, I'm just waiting for Yuletide to go live.) (It went live in mid-edit! So I'm going to vanish for a few days to wallow in fanfic. But first, I'm going to put that page example on a separate page, so it doesn't interfere with the conversation here.)--Arduinna 09:53, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
So there would be pages for Seasons 1-5, and pages for 'SGA Year in Fandom 2004' -> infinity. It's Wiki, so there can be cross-linking back and forth, and that would definitely be cleaner. Thank you for making the new page. That will make discussion easier.
I had no idea that the making of infoboxes was fraught. Gracious! I shall look into the making of similar with boldface headings, then. Have fun off in Yuletide-land! busaikko 12:44, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Busaikko, I do think somebody daring needs to wade in here and set out some lines for the rest of us to color in; I'd do it, but I was too involved in the original, so I vote for you! But I'm sure you'll get a lot of help once the outline of the Seasons and the Years is clearly in there. *cheerleads* --Speranza 20:00, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
So, do we want to name the year pages Stargate Atlantis/2006, etc.? Or something else? Whatever the name, we can just copy over the Season 2 content and work from there, right?--Aethel 20:29, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

This Page 3 Years On

Okay, I read through ALL the talk pages associated with this page. And I read through the page itself and some of the cites. First, I want to point out that no substantive edits have been made to this page since 2008. Most of the information on the page--things like the remix culture section, the discussion of various stories, etc--is duplicated elsewhere. With the very notable exception of some of the references to and cites about some Gen works.

Some other sections could become the germ of full pages, like a page about DADT stories in SGA in particular or an expanded SGA section on the DADT page. But most of this page merely says that various things occurred in the time period covered and any attempts to make something out of that timing are often unknowables--the gestational origin of a bunch of fics with similar themes, for example--given a single uncited reason. For example: Cite note 15 about fandom moving away from a Rodney-centric focus is to the comments in general of a post about actor bashing by Rodney!girls. I have no idea how that relates.

Beyond that, I think the best that can be made out of the various ideas and implementations of this page is use of the timeline feature like on Timeline of Slashed Sources or even a manually created one like Timeline of Star Trek Fandom. The other years set up to mirror this page are essentially blank, but perhaps something could be made of when various comms started, when ships became popular, etc, not just the one year covered here. I honestly don't think a project to identify events within a fandom to this level of detail and to put those events in historical context and context with each other is reflective of the current structure or content of Fanlore. Which is exactly why so much of this content is covered on other topic-specific pages.

I suggest that this page be sandboxed with it's origin page to preserve the useful info not duplicated elsewhere, and we give thought to an SGA Timeline page. I suggest the other years that are blank be deleted.--facetofcathy 18:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I like the idea of having Timeline of Stargate Atlantis Fandom. And a Stargate Atlantis Gen Fanfiction or Stargate Atlantis Gen Fanworks page? I think Fanlore could use more historical synthesis, so I don't want to say that this page was a bad idea. I think it tries to do too much. It seemed to me that the basis of this page was a single-authored meta piece, so we could create a fanwork article about that meta piece and include its salient points. Because it clearly resonated with people :)--æþel 02:28, 7 April 2011 (UTC) P.S. Yes, sandbox this puppy!
Newbie chiming in (all over the place), but I love the idea for the new pages -- though my vote would be for Gen Fanworks over (just) Gen Fanfiction, though Gen Fanfiction will probably make up most of the contents on the page, except oh wait there were those vids... -- and would contribute as much as I could to them. --Sk 03:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
@Aethel, I absolutely intend the gen section on the main page to get moved to its own page. I am a little in over my head for content--I'm an absolute noob in gen SGA, but I think there's enough on the main page--with generous cribbing from here to split off. And, yes, we should have a page that discusses that meta. I think that should happen first perhaps. And then a stab at a more simplified timeline page. @SK, I was thinking Gen Fandom in SGA (phrased like that to keep it from being in with all the pages starting with S on the category page. It would be the first page about gen fandom in particular on Fanlore--facetofcathy 14:50, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I like Gen Fandom in SGA even more! (And I suspect the other main fandom you review would be another biggie that could use such a page, given the first sentence (now, hee) on that page...) Sidenote: I so hope that sga_guide will bring in more editors to fanlore, especially ones more familiar with the gen side and many other parts of SGA I don't feel familiar enough with! --Sk 18:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://fanlore.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stargate_Atlantis_Season_2&oldid=898975"