So as we all know MSPA is impacted heavily by the fandom, especially given that it originally ran off reader commands. Despite this we hardly cover the fandom, focusing purely on MSPA itself. Our previous justification of this in the simplest terms is that we are the MSPA Wiki, not the MSPA fandom Wiki. However given the previously mentioned relationship between the fandom and MSPA this is missing a large part of the picture that is MSPA.
Now aside from the obvious proposal to cover the fandom to a greater extent, is also how it should be handled. Our two current fandom articles; the fan albums and the fan pesterchum user list are both in the Project namespace (and should the proposed fandom memes article ever get finished it would presumably also be there), though there has been disagreement about whether they should be there or in the mainspace. As such I propose we ask Wikia to give us a custom namespace (each Wiki gets about 3), the Fandom namespace, to which we can move those articles and place any future articles.
Even if we decide to not extend fandom coverage I think we should still go for the custom namespace to finally resolve the namespace issue regarding the current coverage.
Also it goes without saying that we would need a policy to cover the exact extent of the fandom namespace so that people don't take it as a sign to add their fanventures or fan characters to it. Should we decide to go ahead with it I think a simple placeholder of "only by admin approval" should cover it until a more extensive policy can be crafted. - The Light6 (talk) 07:02, August 10, 2013 (UTC)
| Archived votes and general discussion |
|---|
Fandom namespace vote[]
Extend fandom coverage[]
Discussion[]One thing I think is currently missing from extending the coverage is, well, something to extend it with. Let's have a couple of examples under discussion before we start worrying about whether or not to extend coverage to them -- Sorceror Nobody, 13:29, August 10, 2013 (UTC)
For the record, I'm conflicted between supporting and opposing extended fandom coverage. Aepokk Venset 19:46, August 12, 2013 (UTC) There should probably be some notability guidelines, especially since this is the MSPA fandom, and every twelve-year-old tumblr user and their mother will come barging in and try to get a page on their fanventure that's maybe five pages long and is filled with OC Mary Sues. Maybe something along the lines of FFWiki's fandom policy, which just says that Square Enix (or, here, AH/What Pumpkin -- this would include references in-comic, like Nepetaquest) or an important website has mentioned the work (for example, getting into one of the Top Three categories on MSPFanventures). This would need a bit of reworking -- HS isn't all that newsy, because it's a comic; there's not much that can be said about it except "wow, this thing is huge". Cat (meow ∙ hunt) 06:27, August 13, 2013 (UTC)
|
Fandom coverage discussion[]
Policy discussion[]
- There should probably be some notability guidelines, especially since this is the MSPA fandom, and every twelve-year-old tumblr user and their mother will come barging in and try to get a page on their fanventure that's maybe five pages long and is filled with OC Mary Sues. Maybe something along the lines of FFWiki's fandom policy, which just says that Square Enix (or, here, AH/What Pumpkin -- this would include references in-comic, like Nepetaquest) or an important website has mentioned the work (for example, getting into one of the Top Three categories on MSPFanventures). This would need a bit of reworking -- HS isn't all that newsy, because it's a comic; there's not much that can be said about it except "wow, this thing is huge".
- —Catuse's post in the above discussion
Input on forming a policy for fandom coverage should go here.
- While I still oppose this project, if we must go forward with it I think a variant of the above proposal should be implemented: to merit inclusion on this wiki, a meme/fan adventure/whatever must have its existence directly and unambiguously acknowledged by Andrew Hussie, either through an in-comic reference or a mention on his Twitter/Tumblr/Formspring. lp2277 | Talk 17:43, August 17, 2013 (UTC)
- Actually it appears we've already broken this rule... (With Equius). But hiatustuck is probably still too broad. Aepokk Venset 04:37, August 18, 2013 (UTC)
- It's reasonable for moderately pervasive memes to be permitted on the relevant article. Why? Because doing so amounts to only as much text as is needed to describe them, i.e. not very much at all. A meme that's absolutely tiny doesn't warrant coverage. A meme that's absolutely huge might get individual coverage, which comes under notability with regards to Hussie acknowledging it. But the middle ground is no less worth covering; it just doesn't get more than a mention. Coverage isn't merely about "the wiki mentions it at all", it's about "the extent to which the wiki mentions it".
- Naturally, any of the existing memes on that page are up for debate once a policy is formed. I for one feel that I saw enough instances of With Equius that it deserves at least a mention -- Sorceror Nobody, 12:15, August 18, 2013 (UTC)
- Actually it appears we've already broken this rule... (With Equius). But hiatustuck is probably still too broad. Aepokk Venset 04:37, August 18, 2013 (UTC)
- To clarify, I wasn't complaining about the With Equius meme being included, I was just being technical and in regards to what lp was saying. Plus the excuse to make a badly constructed "pun". And on the topic of memes, no "Nepeta is dead" yet? Really? For shame. Aepokk Venset 22:13, August 18, 2013 (UTC)
Expansion ideas[]
If you have a suggestion for something to cover, add it as a fourth level heading here. This is less a question of "should we expand coverage?", and more "what things are deemed suitable for expansion?" This is simply because if the answer to the latter turns out to be "none of them", we will end up having addressed the "shouldn't expand it" point of view by default. Nothing too complicated. That said, regardless of whether or not something is approved here, it is still subject to potentially being overturned by subsequent policy created from the above section.
- Fandom terminology - I know there is a bunch of terminology used by the fandom that has no official usage and it might be good idea to document some of it. Examples: Claspect, potato, specularnaodm, IDE (we actually already list this on a page where it doesn't actually fit). We could even include an "ascended terminology" subsection for fan terms that were later made canon. - The Light6 (talk) 13:26, October 28, 2013 (UTC)
- I presume "nakkadiles" would count as an example? Aepokk Venset 17:38, October 28, 2013 (UTC)
- I believe you would be correct. - The Light6 (talk) 17:55, October 28, 2013 (UTC)