Template talk:Fanon

Merge into Template:Fanon

I don't see any real difference between an article on a canonical subject, and a Fanon story. Yet we have two distinct templates for these, and many contributors seem to mix them up. I have therefore altered the Template:Fanon to read "article/story", effectively covering both cases. The next step would be to delete the superflous Template:Fanonarticle. However, this would require small changes to numerous articles which currently include that template. Also, I didn't create the template in the first place. Before purging it for good, therefore, I take this opportunity to ask if anyone knows a good reason to keep it after all?

If nobody objects, then I shall proceed to delete this template and change the articles accordingly in due time. Frabby 13:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I see a clear difference. Using the same tag lumps them into the same category. If you could see how it was before, you'd see a series on military unit and biography articles mixed up with stories, when the intent between the two is quite different. I really wanted to be able to highlight fan fiction (which comes with its own appreciation by BT fandom) and is linked to on the main page.

The answer, if the tag is doomed to deletion, is to add the criteria of differing cat tags in the help file for the different categories of fan articles.

Also note: the deletion review and process tags are now being displayed on the fan articles, as they were added to the templates. I've assured (I hope) one contributor that his custom 'Mech article was not up for deletion. --Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 19:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from (to a degree). But the difference is not within the "Fanon" aspect of the articles. Those stories, 'Mechs, characters etc are all equally fan-made and should therefore receive the same single "Fanon" tag. Case in point, the users who mistake one template for the other, and end up using the wrong template time and again for their fanon article. Would it not be better to lump all Fanon articles together, but add categories to sub-sort them?

As for the deletion template, oops. :/ Unintended side effect. Will remove it from the Fanon template. Frabby 20:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

As I have no problem using the same tag, we're in agreement. Moving on to administration, you and I (appear to) agree that categories would be the way to differentiate. I'm fine with the sub-category concept. How do you propose to institute it? Clarification: normally we used an embedded cat tag within the fanon tag. In this case, doing so lumps them together automatically. --Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:48, 10 March 2010 (UTC)