Template:Did you know nominations/Fan wiki

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by BorgQueen talk 07:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Fan wiki

(

)

... that some editors left Wikipedia to form Wookieepedia, a Star Wars franchise fan wiki, because other editors complained that they were including too much information in Star Wars articles?

Source: Jones, Henry (2021). "Wikis". In Baker, Mona; Blaagaard, Bolette B.; Jones, Henry; Pérez-González, Luis (eds.). The Routledge Encyclopedia of Citizen Media. Critical Perspectives in Citizen Media (ebook ed.). London: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-315-61981-1.

ALT1: ... that some fan wikis document fan fiction? Source: Mittell, Jason (2013). "Wikis and Participatory Fandom". In Delwiche, Aaron; Henderson, Jennifer Jacobs (eds.). The Participatory Cultures Handbook (ebook ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 40–41. ISBN 978-0-203-11792-7.
ALT2: ... that the Star Trek Beyond writers Simon Pegg and Doug Jung consulted the Star Trek fan wiki Memory Alpha and its administrators during the film's production? Source: Comerford, Chris (November 2018). "Participatory Toolboxes: Franchise Fan Wikis as Tools of Textual Production" (PDF). Participations. 15 (2): 286–287.
Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Iktara (song)

Created by Voorts (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 10 past nominations.

voorts (talk/contributions) 21:28, 17 August 2024 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Fun article that meets all of the necessary criteria; AGF on the book sources, as I can't quite seem to get ebook access. I prefer ALT1 and ALT0 slightly behind it; ALT0 might be navel-gazing, but works fine, while ALT2 is a bit too wordy and includes too many links that bury the actual article. Sounder Bruce 03:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

- Thanks. I agree that ALT1 is probably the best; it's pithy and actually about the article topic writ large, instead of just an example. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:11, 22 August 2024 (UTC)