User talk:Sk

From Fanlore
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome on board. I see you've already found (and used) the Gardener mailing list, but feel free to ask questions. Glad to have you on board working on SGA (and any other shiny stuff). --Morgandawn 21:46, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! I just added to my question to the Gardener mailing list, thinking it might be more logical to have both parts of question in one place, but thanks for encouraging asking questions. :) Also yes, lots of shiny stuff! I can add more shiny stuff... and links... and zombies... oooh! ;) --Sk 22:45, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Yay! It's always nice to see more people editing Fanlore. Franzeska 18:22, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm having fun (perhaps a little too much/distractedly), hoping I'm not making too many newbie mistakes. :)
Thinking of which, my email to the Gardener mailing list hasn't gotten a ping back yet, and I remain curious (as I contemplate adding lots more links). So, um, is there an alternate/better place to post my question, or perhaps an existing Fanlore help page I haven't found yet that addresses the preferred way of linking to fanworks that don't already have a fanlore page of their own? (The choices I asked about were: 1-creating redlink for every one, 2-creating external link and no redlink for any such fanwork, 3-not linking the fanwork name but putting a ref-note after it that provides the external link.) Any thoughts/pointers would be very welcome. Thanks! --Sk 19:33, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to put this above Franzeska and Doro's reply, but we at the Wiki comm did ping you back; it just never got to you because *cough* we all forgot to reply-all. We are...very embarrassed. I'll forward a summary of our opinions ASAP. --Awils1 10:16, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your response! Oh that reply-all function... usually more a cause of embarrassment when inadvertently used when it shouldn't have been, but now (for those history books) an example of the opposite. *g* --Sk 17:50, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm not actually a gardener, just a user with a lot of experience editing wikis elsewhere, so I'm not sure about the mailing list part of it. I think it depends on what the wiki page is like and what you're linking to. Creating lots of redlinks is fine, but I like to create a stub page instead because stubs (IMO) encourage people to add to the page in a way that redlinks don't. I'd create a stub if you think the work merits a page of its own. People seem to be doing this for fanworks that are particularly famous, that won awards, that caused wank, etc. Zines also all get their own pages. Often, I just want to use a work as an example of something else (in a list of major works on a page about the creator, in an article on some trope that shows up in the work, on the relevant pairing page). In those cases, I would just directly link it. I'd only use ref tags if I needed to do something more complicated like giving multiple links and explaining the different versions or something. Franzeska 20:01, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Oh, and about general policies: My experience is that most wiki users on most wikis just kind of pick this up from using the wiki a lot. Each wiki has its own culture that develops over time. This stuff is rarely spelled out all that clearly. Fanlore doesn't have notability requirements, so it's particularly open to stub creation and particularly short on official rules about what should and shouldn't be its own article. General user discussion is mostly on this Dreamwidth community. Franzeska 20:07, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the general info and background (will go check out comm) and your views! I will, ah, boldly link where (perhaps) no person has linked before while continuing to figure out what seems to make most sense (um, to me) per fanwork (creator)/fandom. Appreciate the pointers and thoughts! --Sk 20:24, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
I haven't found yet that addresses the preferred way of linking to fanworks that don't already have a fanlore page of their own?
I think everyone who has been working on this wiki for a while has their own system. Right now Fanlore doesn't have that many editors, that's a factor I like to take into account. Meaning a) I only make red links when I intend to make a page for it later, whenever that may be or b) I really think this thing/story/vid/whatever should have a page or will have one eventually (for example a popular trope or something like that). If I redlink a story, I try to add a simple external link so that people can check out the story. Making a lot of stubs currently leads to there being a lot of stubs but no one ever editing them/adding to them, so I try to make pages that can stand on their own, no matter how short they are. Basically, you are on your own. That's not really helpful, is it? *g* Here is an example of mixed wikilinks, external links and red links. (For what it's worth, you can always come back later and use the search engine to find the pages that need a wikilink because you've created the page for something.) --Doro 20:51, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
I think that distinction on redlinking vs. outside-linking makes sense to me/am starting to apply it. Thanks, also for the example! --Sk 21:09, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Question: linking to relevant wikipedia entry in (external resources sections of) fanlore pages

Quoting something from 2008 by user:anatsuno I saw in the Slash talk page, was this ever discussed/decided on as not a good idea?

"[...]I also think, as a sort of guideline, that it's interesting to link to Wikipedia in every article where it's relevant, glossary or other (like for canons, characters, etc), so that the variance between what Fanlore does (look at fandom, written by fen, PPOV) and what a general-purpose encyclopedia (NPOV, etc) does can become apparent and enrich the reader's outlook on things *makes note to say so somewhere else*.--anatsuno 09:33, 17 October 2008 (UTC)"

Because if it's considered more a good idea than not, I'd love to hear (and would start linking to the wikipedia entries, where relevant, on fanlore pages I poke at). Thanks for opinions/thoughts -- or pointers to past discussions/decisions on this! --Sk 23:29, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't remember ever discussing it as a guideline. A link to Wikipedia on relevant pages sounds like a good idea to me.--æþel 00:45, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Unless someone chimes in with "Noooo! Wikipedia harms puppies!" (with relevant citation of course) or such ;) I'll start doing so. --Sk 01:14, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Ha ha ha. I think you're safe linking to Wikipedia whenever it's relevant. Franzeska 14:35, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Current/active questions I've got

  • about linking to wikipedia (see above) -- status: am linking whenever I think of it and it seems relevant --Sk 01:39, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
  • about DVS page at Talk:DVS -- status: hoping for answer from lowercase dvs --Sk 01:39, 12 April 2011 (UTC) updated status: created d page and disambiguation page. --Sk 07:46, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
About that... If we need to rename a page, we move the whole page because otherwise the history is lost. If no one has ever edited the page, it doesn't matter all that much (except that the date of creation will be lost), but if the page has changed over time, it's important to keep that. When you want to move a page, the process is to add a gardener's notice so that a gardener knows that there is something that needs to be done. Also, I think DVS (Slash writer) doesn't really work as disambiguation because they are *both* slash writers. :/ ETA: Also, turning DVS into a disambiguation page isn't really necessary here because the other page isn't named DVS, so there aren't two pages competing for the same page name. The solution in such a case would be to add a disambiguation line to both pages at the top. (On the DVS page it could say "You may be looking for d, ..." on the d page it could say "You may be looking for DVS, ...") --Doro 09:23, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Updated status: added question and template about renaming and re-redirecting page for gardeners and/or admins at D and DVS (Slash writer) (talk) pages. --Sk 04:50, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
  • about restructuring Icarus fanwriter page at Talk:Icarus -- status: thoughts pro or con, anyone? --Sk 01:39, 12 April 2011 (UTC) updated status: done --Sk 07:46, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
  • about adding Reverse Bangs at Talk:Big Bang -- status: thoughts pro or con, anyone? --Sk 01:39, 12 April 2011 (UTC) updated status: resolved --Sk 07:46, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
  • chimed in re question of merging/deleting one of duplicate pages at Talk:Winnie-the-Pooh (character) page, am in favor. status: Hoping to see others chime in? --Sk 04:50, 17 May 2011 (UTC) updated status: resolved
  • about use of "Sample" (vs. Example vs. Notable vs. any kind of modifying word) in subheads; intended to not imply listings are complete and lower further-editing threshold for newer fl users, but usage of specific words and concept in general may make experienced editors cringe. At User talk:Frogspace -- status: trying to ponder and frame possible whats and whys more usefully; additional thoughts very welcome. --Sk 04:50, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
  • about whether to spin off "Notable Fanworks" sections on McKay/Sheppard page onto its own page (plus linking/ease of finding McShep fanworks with their own fanlore pages) at Talk:McKay/Sheppard -- status: input very welcome. --Sk 04:50, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
  • about making or working on glossary- or concept-type pages and/or using glossary template even if I may not have links to properly fannish content at Talk:Tau'ri. (See also belated related question at Talk:Tok'ra page, where I added glossary infobox in the absence of any existing infobox there to be able to have the ToC and related pages features on the page, but is there a better/different infobox template I should have used?) -- status: hoping for guidance. --Sk 04:50, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
  • tried to more clearly (though I may have failed) frame some of my thoughts and questions related to several of the topics above in new Thoughts on Fanlore Editing section at my user page. --Sk 08:26, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
These are great! Gives a lot to think about. *ponders* --Doro 18:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Questions about the Song Fandom page re Music Video Fandom and how to (better) categorize the Song Fandom page at Talk:Song Fandom -- status: hoping for input. --Sk 21:39, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Questions about renaming and handling of Of Color (meant to be a glossary and jump-off page that other pages will redirect to) page at Talk:Of Color. -- status: more input and thoughts very welcome. --Sk 03:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Spam Fighting Heroes

If I knew how, I would make you a Spam Banner! icon with Thor's hammer and a red cape or something. You are awesome! :D --Doro 15:33, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Hee, thanks! Banhammering them is (now that we have a Weird Al page) like weasel-stomping -- a lighthearted fun way to hammer out any other trivial frustrations. --Sk 21:32, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
I second Doro's thought. I also want to say, hey, I'm glad you're here at Fanlore, Sk. --Mrs. Potato Head 21:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Aw, thanks. --Sk 21:53, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Priestfic

I wish I could add some to this but the three fandoms where I know the fiction fairly well doesn't have any! Have been missing you on Fanlore, Sk. --Mrs. Potato Head 00:20, 10 March 2012 (UTC)