Forum:TC:Fan fiction

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.

The result of the debate was No consensus. Default to keep.. Grunny ^(Talk) 09:10, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Fan fiction (talk - history - links - logs)

Just try reading this garbage. Especially the "Other terminology" section. As a respectable wiki, we cannot allow this to stay. Basically, the whole article is: a canon quote, one useful sentence, a universal glossary of all stoopa fan-fiction writers, the glossary of di'kutla Star Wars fan-fiction writers, and list of links to websites that publish this junk. Nothing of value would be lost if we merge this article to fanon article. By "merge" I only mean "merge the opening sentence", which I already did. I thus let you decide this article's fate. Mauser^Comlink 10:50, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

Redirect to fanon

1. Mauser^Comlink 10:50, September 12, 2009 (UTC)
2. I Fully agree with nom. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 20:35, September 12, 2009 (UTC)
3. As far as Wookieepedia is concerned, fan-fiction, fanon and anything else of the sort should fall under the one umbrella. -- AdmirableAckbar ^(Talk) 20:38, September 12, 2009 (UTC)
4. Per Acky. Grunny ^(Talk) 01:53, September 13, 2009 (UTC)
5. IFYLOFD ^{(You will pay the price for your lack of vision!)} 01:55, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

   Per Acky, as well as Nayayen below. —Master Jonathan^{(Jedi Council Chambers)} 03:28, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

6. Jonjedigrandmaster ^{(Jedi Beacon)} 16:00, September 13, 2009 (UTC)
7. Per Acky. Green Tentacle ^(Talk) 20:39, September 13, 2009 (UTC)
8. Grand Moff Tranner ^(Comlink) 20:43, September 13, 2009 (UTC)
9. JangFett ^Talk 21:14, September 13, 2009 (UTC)
10. Per Acky -- —Harrar ^{(Cut the comm chatter)} 22:20, September 13, 2009 (UTC)
11. Nayayentalk 07:39, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
12. SoresuMakashi^{(Everything I tell you is the truth)} 12:46, September 15, 2009 (UTC)
13. You say fanon, he says fan-fiction, I say they're synonymous for the purposes of this wiki. Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 16:54, September 16, 2009 (UTC)
14. Here's a revolutionary idea: Let's straighten these things out finally, and move fanon over fan fiction and edit it accordingly. Fanon has a specific meaning in general fandom. -- Darth Culator ^(Talk) 03:41, September 17, 2009 (UTC)
15. Per Culator. Havac 03:02, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

    As much garbage as smut and PWP. NaruHina ^Talk 03:53, September 20, 2009 (UTC) (Vote struck per policy)

16. Based more on speculations and fan misconceptions. I bet every fan has their own interpretation of fan fiction. Andykatib 09:27, September 20, 2009 (UTC)

Keep

1. Believe it or not, it was we who originally mistook fan fiction for fanon. The Star Wars Fanon Wiki, which we created, should honestly be called "The Star Wars Fan Fiction Wiki." Fanon used to refer to things people thought were true within canon, whereas fan fiction never aspired to be more than fan-created fiction. All the derisive language about the article itself is moot because we can edit the thing and fix that. Graestan^(Talk) 12:38, September 19, 2009 (UTC)
2. Per Graestan. jSarek 08:53, September 20, 2009 (UTC)
3. I agree that fan fiction =/= fanon. I would even support the deletion of the fan fiction article and keeping the fanon article. Toprawa and Ralltiir 17:36, September 21, 2009 (UTC)
   • Isn't this vote in the wrong section, then? :-P Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 02:30, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
     • He probably means fan fiction ≠ fanon. --Michaeldsuarez ^{(Talk) (Deeds)} 02:57, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
4. Have to agree with Grae on this one. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 01:01, September 22, 2009 (UTC)
5. LtNOWIS 01:24, September 23, 2009 (UTC)
6. Fan fiction and fanon are not the same things. --Michaeldsuarez ^{(Talk) (Deeds)} 02:08, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
7. Per Graestan. We should at least have an article defining the term, even if the current article would need significant work to pass even the old notability policy. —Silly Dan _(talk) 14:03, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

   Gotta agree with Grae. SpartHawg948 10:17, October 1, 2009 (UTC) (Vote struck, reason: Per policy: less than 50 mainspace edits -- Toprawa and Ralltiir 01:58, October 3, 2009 (UTC))

8. After reconsidering, per Grae and Dan. —Master Jonathan^{(Jedi Council Chambers)} 23:04, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
9. Per Grae. --Muuuuuurgh 09:01, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Comments

If you want to create another voting option, please don't do this. Thank you. Mauser^Comlink 10:50, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

• I personally think that some of the external links could either be put into an External Links section on fanon; those being the Wikipedia one and possibly the TFN links also. The others could be added to List of fan sites per WP:NFP. Nayayentalk 16:31, September 12, 2009 (UTC)
• I respect your request to keep only two voting options Mauser, but personally I think that the page could be kept, albeit with heavy editing. Your call though. The Doctor K.^{(No I'm not really a doctor.)} 02:36, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
  • Then the best thing you can do is: create a subpage of your userpage and show us what do you want this article to look like. Then we can debate over it. The vote is for the current state of the article. Mauser^Comlink 13:42, September 29, 2009 (UTC)