User talk:Aethel/2012 Archive

Archived Talk Page: This page is an archive of talk from User talk:Aethel, created on 4 January 2014. This page should not be edited. If you wish to continue a discussion including on this page, please do so on User talk:Aethel, and link to this page.

Long template sentences aren't wrapping

Hey, the template pages you recntly edited (Help:Pairing pages/Template and Help:Character pages/Template) aren't wrapping for me in Opera & Chrome on XP, screen resolution 1024x768, so the longer sentences are going off the side of the screen with no scroll bar. I think it's because of the pre tags but I don't know how to make it wrap :/ -- Tai 01:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't know how to make it wrap either :( I guess we could try shortening the text.--æþel 01:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks like the only way it can be done with pre tags is by using CSS :/ I don't know if there's another html tag that would do the trick. Since the text is going to be replaced on the new pages anyway I think it would be simplest to shorten/abuse the enter key, yeah. -- Tai 01:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

identity concern edit request

Also, as it looks like you're online, may I ask for your Administratory assistance re Talk:D (identity concern/edit revisions)?

Thank You

Thank you for switching my welcome message over to the right page. --Mrs. Potato Head 02:57, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

no problem.--æþel 03:21, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Protocol?

This is kind of an odd request, but is there a protocol/code for adding [citation needed] to a page? I need to add it to a page I was working on because I was unable to find a link for an item I think needs citing, thought I know the links exist. I just ran out of time and energy.

I was also wondering because I came across a page yesterday that had only one citation and lots of editorializing, and it felt awkward to just say that on the Talk page, when maybe the person writing was actually taking the material directly from somewhere I haven't seen before and maybe thought it was common knowledge. --the old briar pipe 20:53, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

The code is {{citation needed}}, but we don't have a strict set of guidelines for applying it. Since you are the editor adding the material, and you know there's a link out there somewhere, that sounds like a good time to add the template. Because of Fanlore's PPOV policy, a lot of content would have to be cited as [in this editor's opinion/analysis/recollection], so it's hard to say when the citation-needed template should be used at all. We want editorializing! If it seems like the editor's view conflicts with your perception of something, then asking for clarification on the talk page is a good idea; then the page can be updated to include more viewpoints, something like "some fans interpreted the situation THIS WAY, and some fans remember it like THAT" etc. Or there could be a citation to back it up. Or it could be a typo.--æþel 21:14, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll add it to the page I was working on and then try to get up the courage to post on the Talk page of the other one. (And if I haven't said it enough, thank you for being in chat the other day helping us, and for all the work you've done. You've made it much less intimidating to edit here, and I'm a pretty easily intimidated person on these kinds of things.) --the old briar pipe 22:57, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome! I don't want anyone to be intimidated by editing, so I'm glad that worked. :) If you let me know about the next chat/editing party, I'll try to drop in.--æþel 18:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

thanks and search question

Hi Aethel, thanks for answering my bafflement about the parent categories for Fandoms by Canon Type stuff, and for finding & pointing to the text for the defaultsort question.

It turns out there is also text for that on the Help:People pages page, which I'll copypaste from onto some of the pages I looked for info about it on that don't have it. And (sigh, yet) another question:

Earlier, before I asked on MPH's page, when I tried to find usable text/info about the default sort stuff, one of the methods I used was using the site's search box to look for "default sort" and "sorting order" (using search not go and then in results specifically ticking Help pages). But pages with the type of text I was looking for did not come up in the first results page. If (I later checked) I'd searched for "defaultsort" as one word, a page with it would have come up in the first results page. What that seems to indicate is that the search function (for this term, but extrapolating that probably means for others too) doesn't give you the result you want unless you already know the exact text you need to find -- which would mean the site's search function is not so useful to non-power users.

I'm wondering if there's a way to add a Google-site specific search box or some other Boolean-standard search box on the site? I sometimes remember to use Google with the "site:fanlore.org" delimiter, but often not. And if other people trying to find stuff on help or policy or most non-article pages using the site's search box are perhaps also running into this (maybe that's one of the things Starsky13 was having trouble with, in (not) finding the identity help policy pages?) using a third-party tool to improve the site's search functionality so that results are more in line with the type of results and variability/relevance they see with non-fanlore search tools might be quite helpful in letting people find stuff (themselves, without asking questions) and improving the userfriendliness?

(And sorry to be running around the wiki in a "more confusion/random questions than pretty new pages or page edits" today.) --Sk 02:36, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I added the Google tip to Help:Searching. I have no idea how to put a Google button/search box on Fanlore itself. I know TV Tropes has something like that, though Google ads appear in the search results, which we want to avoid. I can add this to our list of things to investigate. Thanks!--æþel 00:09, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

P.S. Thanks for adding the new help text!--æþel 00:46, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

"Fandoms by Category" language categories question

Hey, I've a question about using the "Japanese-speaking fandom" category on pages like kojinshi. That category seems to be used only very rarely on the wiki, and I've intentionally avoided using it for doujinshi-related stuff because plenty of non-Japanese fans participate in doujinshi fandoms as well, and in multiple languages. Some Japanese terms are used as they are by doujinshi fans who communicate in non-Japanese languages, and others are changed or used in a different way from the original Japanese. I just tend to highlight the Japanese usage because that's the doujinshi scene I'm familiar with, unlike the one where Chinese, Korean, French, German etc are the lingua franca. (Thinking about this, I realize I've been a bit Japanese-fandom-centric in some of my descriptions lately - will go fix that.) All in all, I feel like doujinshi-related practices are characterized much more by a "common interest", like vidding, than by a language.

So I'm not sure "Japanese-speaking fandom" is the best "Fandoms by Category" category for this, but alternatives... Hmm. "Anime and Manga Fandom" isn't really a great fit for doujinshi-related content either, because although most doujinshi are based on anime and manga, a very significant number are based on other things (original stuff, RPF, others). Maybe instead of "Japanese-speaking fandom", something like "Doujin" would be a more precise "Fandoms by Category" category for doujinshi-related terminology? "Doujin" literally means "people with a common interest/goal", and is a pretty much all-encompassing term for fanwork creation practices that are seen as characteristic of Japanese fan communities, but without the additional nationality/language baggage that automatically comes with the label "Japanese". It might keep the door open better for non-Japanese-speaking fans who make doujinshi and use vocab/conventions that can be traced back to Japanese-speaking communities. What do you think?

(Has this been discussed elsewhere? I feel like I've been in a discussion about the language categories before... the volunteer forums, maybe? A journal?)

Oh, another question - would you say the category "Doujinshi" meant to be used for categorizing individual fanworks, or can I also use it for anything doujinshi-related, like terminology or articles about doujinshi fans? I assumed it was the latter, but now I'm starting to doubt. Mixing things like glossary terms in with the fanworks might not turn out to be such a great idea. --Nele

I've been thinking about how to categorize the doujinshi-related pages as well, since there's enough for a separate category now. Perhaps Category:Doujinshi Fandom? Aethel, could we get a new category? (Also, Nele, you can sign your notes on talk pages with ~~~~. And thanks for all the awesome new doujinshi-related pages, I really like them.) -- Kylara 06:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I considered "doujinshi fandom" as well, but I'm not entirely sure how much sense it will make in the long run to (even just verbally) separate doujinshi from other doujin stuff like doujin music or games. A lot of doujinshi-related terms apply to those other media as well, like things about conventions and many websites. But just "doujin" is probably unfamiliar to many people... How does "doujin fandom" sound? (Whoops, thanks for pointing that out.) Nele 07:16, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Doujin Fandom sounds good to me. "Doujin" isn't unfamiliar to fans, but I suspect most who use it are using it synonymously with "doujinshi." That shouldn't be a problem, I think. -- Kylara 08:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I assume aethel added the cat because on the page it says "a term used most often in Japanese fandom". The language cat is usually used on pages that document stuff that is in another language. For example, I created the German-Speaking Fandom cat (which was the first language cat) for all those pages about German language zines, websites, etc. --Doro 08:25, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I get the general idea behind the language category. I just suspect that "Japanese-language fandom" may be too limiting in the case of doujin-related words, because doujin(shi) fandom and many of the terms associated with it have spread far beyond just Japan and the Japanese language. It's a set of practices that's definitely not limited to one language, and I probably sound a bit too Japan-centric in my descriptions because Japanese doujin fandom is the one I know best. (Unfortunately, I'm fantastically unqualified to talk about -say- Chinese or Indonesian doujin fans.) So, I can see the point of labeling a doujinshi in Japanese as belonging to "Japanese-language fandom", but labeling doujin-related practices as "Japanese-language fandom" doesn't feel quite correct. Does that make sense? --Nele 11:54, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

There's no reason that the existing Doujinshi category can't be used as a fandom category, like Vidding. We can add it as a subcategory under Fandoms by Community.--æþel 12:05, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually, it's not the first time someone suggests that mixing things like glossary terms in with the fanworks might not turn out to be such a great idea. IMO the vidding category suffers because it doesn't have a vids category for fanworks and vidding for everything else and the fiction writing category could benefit from a fanfiction category. Having categories that are exclusively for fanworks and categories for pages about fanactivity in general might be a discussion we should revisit. If we had more fanwork categories, we could break down the singular fanwork cat with its ~11,000 pages. Just a thought! --Doro 13:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

That would be a good start! But I'm not sure it'll do in the long run, because putting everything doujin-related under the Doujinshi umbrella is a bit like suggesting that all fanworks and practices associated with English-language media fandom can fit under the label "fanfic". Doujinshi (zines) are the most visible fanworks made in doujin-centric spaces, but they're definitely not the only works made there. Some of the stuff we've put in the Doujinshi category up to now, like info about conventions or circles, should technically be in a broader category as well because it applies not just to doujin-shi (doujin zines) but also to doujin music, doujin games, and a bunch of other fannish doujin media. Right now, we don't have much on other doujin media besides doujinshi. But that will hopefully change, so maybe it's better if we don't keep perpetuating the "everything is doujinshi" idea by lumping it all into one category? --Nele 13:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposal based on Doro and Nele's feedback

I wouldn't mind splitting out the fanwork pages from everything else. It'll be simpler to implement now with all the templates we've got. So we could start with....

Category:Doujin Fandom

Category:Doujinshi

Category:Vidding

Category:Vids

Category:Fiction Writing

Category:Fanfiction (or "Fanfiction Stories"?)

--æþel 23:54, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

That should work great for the doujin-related things, I think. --Nele 05:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

The fiction one is hard. I'd be hesitant to make that decision without more input and info. --Mrs. Potato Head 13:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I also like this for doujin-related pages. -- Kylara 21:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Doujin fandom cat created! It sounds like we should take the larger issue to a dreamwidth post.--æþel 03:37, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Re the Category:Vids category - this is the one that would be attached to the Vid template? If I read correctly Category:Vids would be a subcategory of Category:Vidding, with the goal of moving the great sea of individ fanvid pages into smaller groups? In which case, all the existing fandom specific vid subcategories would be...what? I see this as either

Category:Vidding

Category:Vids (all vids, even those with fandom specific vid subcategories will be here. We'd be shiting the "sea" from Category:Vidding to Category:Vids with it placed here)

Category: Firefly Vids

Category: Buffy Vids

or....

Category:Vidding

Category:Vids (this is where the great sea of unassigned vids would rest until they get a Fandom specific vid subcategory)

Category: Firefly Vids

Category: Buffy Vids --MeeDee 04:25, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

If I understand this correctly, all fanvids would still be together in Category:Vids (or Vid?) because that category would be automatically added with the template, yes. It would still be clearer because events etc. would be in Category:Vidding, but maybe not much. Fandom-specific categories like Category: Firefly Vids should be subcategories of Category:Vids imo. To make it even clearer, maybe we could not add Category:Vids to the template and instead add the category (Vids for unassigned or fandom-specific) manually each time? The same for Category:Fanfiction.--Tiyire 20:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Please not "Fanfiction stories"! As opposed to "fan non-fiction stories", would that be? --Greer Watson 04:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Automation

I saw you have a Category redirect issue on your to-do list, I have a bot that can do that long with other menial tasks including automatic archival of pages based on the date of the last comment in a section. Phoenix 16:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Category redirect automation would be awesome! I'm not sure about the automatic archival--is there a way to limit automatic archiving based on page length? Very few talk pages get as long as this one, and a lot of talk pages may have one or two comments from three years ago that might still need to be addressed.--æþel 16:15, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

It can do it by the number of sections remaining, (and can be added on a per page basis so low activity pages can be skipped.) see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_soft_redirected_categories for the redirect setup we basically need a category to track the redirects and a template on each like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Category_redirect once that is done it will be trivial to port over the redirect tool. Phoenix 00:41, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

On double redirects

I note you've undone my fixing of the double redirect for Jones, presumably for identity concerns -- but the page is still in the double redirect list, so something probably needs to be done to prevent the next person coming along to clean that section doing exactly the same. Cheers, Espresso Addict 08:21, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Whoops, yes, the identity cleanup process is taking longer than anticipated. I moved the page so it shouldn't appear in the double redirect page anymore.--æþel 03:18, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you, æþel, for dividing up The LOC Connection. Another similar unwieldy page (out of many for which I am to blame) is Come Together.

When I get done with the Come Together reviews (the page itself is "finished"), and with The K/S Press reviews (another monster), I'm going to make separate pages for a lot of the fanfiction these K/S letterzines review. That'll help some with pages like Scattered Stars, First Time (Star Trek: TOS zine) and T'hy'la, though probably not enough. --Mrs. Potato Head 23:54, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome! You can see a list of the longest pages here: Special:LongPages. I look at it once in a while and try to split up whatever has risen to the top. --æþel 01:20, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

ST Category

I'm starting to make individual pages for fiction in the K/S zines. I'm making them when I see that there are three or more reviews/comments. This is going to be a long, long, long haul, and I'm not even close to being done with The K/S Press. I figure it'll take me at least six months. Question before I get too far: are the cats on these stories I added this morning correct? The Category:Star Trek TOS Fanfiction one, specifically? Also, seeing how all these stories (and there's many!) are K/S, any logic in making a separate category for them? The reason I ask is they are going to completely overwhelm the TOS fanfiction page. Or would that be category be a bad idea? It's easy for me to categorize the fiction this way as K/S fiction was what Come Together, The LOC Connection, The K/S Press all focused on. It, however, may not be a category others would find as clear cut to use later. --Mrs. Potato Head (talk) 17:56, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Star Trek TOS Fanfiction is a good idea, and I started adding some more Star Trek fanfic categories. If you think there's going to be a ton of just K/S fanfic pages, I say go ahead and create Category:Star Trek TOS K/S Fanfiction. We already have a Category:Star Trek TOS K/S Art. Even if Category:Star Trek TOS Fanfiction winds up being empty, at least everyone can easily see what area of TOS fandom needs work. :) I guess the only question is how you define the boundaries between K/S and friendship stories. Options: everything that retrospectively looks like K/S, only that which defined itself as K/S? Whatever you decide, you can add a note to the category page to describe what is and is not in the category. --æþel (talk) 18:08, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

There is going to be a ton of it. The distinction as to what is K/S and "isn't" is pretty much being defined for me as these specific letterzines didn't generally accept LoCs for non-K/S and when they did, had all sorts of qualifiers as to why. These stories I feel confident about. It's how other fans will define less obvious ones later I worry about. I guess with the zine fic, I personally will make the distinction based on how the zine defined itself. --Mrs. Potato Head (talk) 18:19, 9 December 2012 (UTC)