Forum:TC:List of fanon creations

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:List of fanon creations

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete. jSarek 00:18, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

List of fanon creations (talk - history - links - logs)

I really don't see why we would have this at all. We've had a solid no-fanon policy from the beginning of the site, and this just seems to be the antithesis of that. The reason it was originally created was to stop people creating pages about the characters, but we created the constantly recreated pages page for that very same reason. Rather than have this list, I'd suggest just redirecting them all to the CRP page instead. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 16:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete

  1. Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 16:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  2. I hate these pages. Delete per Jaymach and redirect to WP:CRP. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 18:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  3. Speedy Delete Not even sure that this should be discussed. Ridiculous page. Cull Tremayne 18:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  4. Kill it with fire. This page served a purpose back in ye olden dayes of yore but by now we've sufficiently consolidated the internet's knowledge of canon and discredited people like Stupidshadow that there's no such thing as "notable fanon" anymore. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 18:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  5. Delete. I wonder if idiots use this page as source material when they add fanon to the real articles. Graestan(Talk) 18:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  6. Destroy - Obselete and serves only as an invitation to add more fanon. -- I need a name (Complain here) 19:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  7. Delete per everyone. Chack Jadson (Talk) 19:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  8. This is a no-brainer. Delete. - JMAS Hey, it's me! 19:30, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  9. Delete per Jaymach. Green Tentacle (Talk) 19:39, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  10. Delete and redirect. Greyman Jan.png (Talk) 19:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  11. Kill it with iodine because iodine isn't naturally-occurring on our planet.--Goodwood Redstarbird (Alliance Intelligence) 03:59, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  12. Delete but allow some redirects which actually are notable fanon to point at either the source or a canon-compliant article on the subject. —Silly Dan (talk) 16:50, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  13. Per Dan and Culator. Unit 8311 19:42, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  14. Per Dan and Culator. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 20:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  15. I can understand why it's been around so long, but the Fanon wiki should be the place for this list, not Wookieepedia. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 11:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  16. Kyp 01:17, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
  17. Give it the Teru Mikami treatment NaruHina Talk Anakinsolo 05:17, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep

  1. I really do think it's helpful and educational for a random person who just found some common fanon fact on the Internet to be able to come here and find out, not only that it's fanon, but where it came from so they know not to fully trust the site in question. Further, for better or worse, some of these things ARE notable in and of themselves within the fan community, and ought to be covered in some manner on this site (so long as it is perfectly clear that the material is not canonical). jSarek 00:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  2. Per jSarek. --Jedimca0(Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 16:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  3. Gotta go with the Vulcan here. KEJ 19:02, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  4. Yeah, I think it's a good thing to have. When somebody comes here looking for Xio Jade, this informs them that it's fanon. Informing... that's what we do, no? -- Ozzel 05:25, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  5. I too believe that some ignorant fool, yes they exist, will try his damndest to make articles on fanon if he so hears it from a fanon site, but as said previously, this page serves as a way to tell that guy, nuh-uh, as long as the redirect is to here. Notability on the other hand is disputable, but the more notable ones should remain. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:41, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  6. Per Riff, though the name of the page should probably be changed to avoid unintentionally saying "yes, you can put your fanon creation here." Something like "List of fanon often mistaken for canon" ...though that sounds kinda lame. Gonk (Gonk!) 16:57, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge

Comments