![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
I've been trying to add more entries to Fanlore about podfic and have run into a bit of an issue. When I was creating new pages I was titling them "Title (podfic)" to help distinguish that this was an entry about the podfic not about the fic, which normally has the same title.
The problem though, is that this goes against current Fanlore policies to only add an honourific to an entry if there's a conflicting entry of the same name and there's a need to disambiguate. So the gardeners, rightly, were changing the names of the pages I created to remove the honourific.
And while I totally understand the reason for the policy, it still made me nervous because without the (podfic) in the title it just wasn't as clear that the entry was a podfic entry. Sure enough, one of the entries I made was later edited in a way to make it seem more like a fic entry (it's since been changed back and with other additions).
So I'd like to have a conversation about what we can do to make sure that podfic entries are welcomed on Fanlore and that future editors, trying to be helpful but not aware that the entry is a podfic entry, won't end up morphing the entries into fic entries. I've spoken to some individual podficcers about this as well as some of the Fanlore gardeners, and here's some of the suggestions we've come up with so far:
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
klb suggested that one way to deal with it is to include "podfic" in the title, but not as an honourific. So "Title podfic" would be how the pages are named. Most of the time, in fannish day-to-day conversations, people will often specify when they're talking about a podfic if the context of the situation doesn't already imply it. And when you look at places like AO3 or general fandom comms, many podficcers add that sort of distinction when they post their work. So adding "podfic" to the title does reflect podfic fandom today.
Sparcicle suggested that we add a note to the top of podfic pages saying "This page is about the podfic. For the story, see Title (story)."
This will give an immediate visual clue to those viewing the page that this is a page for the podfic and gives them a link to the fic page (or the opportunity to create a page for the fic if it doesn't already exist, as it won't in most cases).
There was some debate in the talk page where this was brought up that (story) is perhaps not the correct honourific and, while I'm throwing my 2 cents in, I'd like to say that I'd prefer to see the fic getting an honourific like (fanfic) instead, since the podfic is a story too (as are vids and comics and many other fanarts). In fact, what the fic and podfic share is the story, what we need to disambiguate is which medium the story is being told in.
aethel suggested adding a grey banner to the infobox to make it clearer that the template is a podfic template.
Personally, I think I like options 2 and 3 together best, but I thought I'd ask others how they feel before I start creating a bunch more pages. And please feel free to add more suggestions!
The problem though, is that this goes against current Fanlore policies to only add an honourific to an entry if there's a conflicting entry of the same name and there's a need to disambiguate. So the gardeners, rightly, were changing the names of the pages I created to remove the honourific.
And while I totally understand the reason for the policy, it still made me nervous because without the (podfic) in the title it just wasn't as clear that the entry was a podfic entry. Sure enough, one of the entries I made was later edited in a way to make it seem more like a fic entry (it's since been changed back and with other additions).
So I'd like to have a conversation about what we can do to make sure that podfic entries are welcomed on Fanlore and that future editors, trying to be helpful but not aware that the entry is a podfic entry, won't end up morphing the entries into fic entries. I've spoken to some individual podficcers about this as well as some of the Fanlore gardeners, and here's some of the suggestions we've come up with so far:
klb suggested that one way to deal with it is to include "podfic" in the title, but not as an honourific. So "Title podfic" would be how the pages are named. Most of the time, in fannish day-to-day conversations, people will often specify when they're talking about a podfic if the context of the situation doesn't already imply it. And when you look at places like AO3 or general fandom comms, many podficcers add that sort of distinction when they post their work. So adding "podfic" to the title does reflect podfic fandom today.Sparcicle suggested that we add a note to the top of podfic pages saying "This page is about the podfic. For the story, see Title (story)."
This will give an immediate visual clue to those viewing the page that this is a page for the podfic and gives them a link to the fic page (or the opportunity to create a page for the fic if it doesn't already exist, as it won't in most cases).
There was some debate in the talk page where this was brought up that (story) is perhaps not the correct honourific and, while I'm throwing my 2 cents in, I'd like to say that I'd prefer to see the fic getting an honourific like (fanfic) instead, since the podfic is a story too (as are vids and comics and many other fanarts). In fact, what the fic and podfic share is the story, what we need to disambiguate is which medium the story is being told in.
aethel suggested adding a grey banner to the infobox to make it clearer that the template is a podfic template. Personally, I think I like options 2 and 3 together best, but I thought I'd ask others how they feel before I start creating a bunch more pages. And please feel free to add more suggestions!
no subject
It's not a honorific (at least not the way I understand it? The dictionary tells me it means "giving or expressing honor or respect"; is there another meaning I'm missing as an EFL speaker?), it's a way to make it possible for several pages with exactly the same name to exist on Fanlore. If the name is not exactly the same (the 24 Hours/24 HOURS example I gave you on one of the talk pages), there is no need for disambiguation in the title of a page. That said, if there is going to be a separate page about a podfic as a fanwork, the naming of the page should follow the naming rules for all fanwork pages, otherwise the treatment of podfic on Fanlore would be not equal to the treatment of other fanworks (see for example Break Like Time: The Fifth Column, a page about a fic trailer for the story of the same name which doesn't have a Fanlore page) and therefore send the message that podfic is not equal. Also, it wouldn't be practical because it means editors would be expected to know that there are different rules for podfic pages than for all other pages, which increases the risk of breaking some editing rules without meaning to.
Adding the word "Podfic" to the name of a podfic, if that's not how the podfic creator named it to begin with, would be forcing a different name on the work and it would set precedent for that kind of approach for other fanwork pages. Forcing a different name on a fanwork is generally something Fanlore doesn't do and I think it's something we really should avoid. (However, if it became general practice for podficcers to include "Podfic" in the name of the podfic it would be part of the page title but so far I haven't seen that practice in naming podfics; the name is easy to find out by checking the entry where the podfic was posted and by checking the cover associated with it.)
Adding a disambiguation line makes sense when there already is a page for the fic, although I would hope it would already be wikilinked in the "Based On" field in the template or in the text of the page. Always adding a disambiguation line with a redlinked non-existing page would suggest that for every podfic page to exist, there would also need to be a corresponding fic page. On the one hand, that's not true, on the other hand, it would elevate the fic page to a higher importance than the podfic page while at the same time marking the podfic as a lesser fanwork that is always in need of the disclaimer that it's not something else.
Frankly, that seems like overkill to me. What's the worse that could happen? Some other editor feels inspired to add more information! That's a good thing. So what if it's about the fic? It's still new information that wasn't there before. Success! What to do with that information is part of what gardeners and other editors are there for. Maybe it should be moved to a separate page. Maybe it should both be on the same page. Maybe it's wrong and needs to be removed. Maybe it should be reworded and moved to a different section. Maybe there need to be new templates for pages that combine more than one fanwork. Maybe one or the other template works fine, depending on the examples in question. These discussions happen on the talk pages of the respective articles. Fanlore articles aren't static. They change over time and they change a lot. Someone adding something in a way you think is wrong? Completely normal and exactly what drives the growths and changes of an article, because everything can be corrected. Also, making mistakes is normal when editing a wiki, especially for new editors, and an essential part of the learning curve when editing a wiki. There is no rule that won't be broken repeatedly by several people. Basing decisions only on the fear that someone might make a mistake is not a good basis for making decisions about wiki editing rules.
Even if we go by the assumption that it was not a mistake and instead the edit of someone who thought that both fic and podfic belong on the same page, it would still hardly be a unique reaction to podfic. Just look at pages about zines made of popular netfic. Also many, many fic pages have sections about podfic on the page. If that's an acceptable way of dealing with this, the other way around shouldn't be a problem either. If the section about a fic gets too big, it can still be moved to a separate page, just like it's done the other way around.
Personally, I like aethel's suggestion best because it clearly marks the page as being about a particular type of fanwork and gives a prominent link in the header that invites the reader to find out more about that particular thing. Also, it treats all fanwork pages the same, improves the templates, and gives us reasons to make even more specific templates, which sounds like an all-around win to me.
no subject
I don't disagree with any of your conclusions about fic and podfic being on the same page as long as the entries aren't both long, or about using aethel's suggestion (and I don't see why they can't both happen. It can be marked as a podfic page but still include some info about the fic that the podfic is a reading of, since that is information closely connected to the podfic), but I do want to clarify that the problem here wasn't that someone *added* info about the fic to the page. The only change they made was from
'''This Never Happened ''' is a Frank Iero/Gerard Way [[podfic]] by klb (3:05:31).
to
'''This Never Happened ''' is a Frank Iero/Gerard Way fanfic originally written by bexless, of which klb made a [[podfic]] (3:05:31).
and from
This was created for [[podficbigbang]]
to
The podfic was created for [[podficbigbang]]
Note that the info that it was written by bexless had already been present on the podfic page, along with a link to the text of the fic, so the addition of the author's name to that first sentence was not new information.
The only reason I'm clarifying that point is because I don't want there to be an implication that it would have inherently been a problem to add information about the fic onto the page about the podfic. Especially if it was added in a subsection further down the page, I doubt anybody would have had much of a problem with this. I feel like this situation has been read in a lot of places as podficcers not wanting any information about the fic on a fanlore page about podfic, and I don't think that's the source of the reaction to the edit at all!
no subject
And I replied to paraka on the talk page "then change it back". I also said in my comment above: "Maybe it's wrong and needs to be removed."
no subject
no subject
no subject
'''This Never Happened ''' is a Frank Iero/Gerard Way [podfic]] (3:05:31) of a fanfic written by bexless
that again would not have sparked the slightest bit of concern on my part, or, I'm guessing, the part of most of the people who were worried about the implications of the edit that was actually made. I would have seen it as helpful and great, because more visibility for that awesome fic and that awesome author are excellent things. (In fact, helping introduce new people to fics I love is a part of why I make podfic.)
no subject
no subject
Frankly I think all this is a considerable over-reaction to a single mistake by a new editor. People have made plenty of dafter errors on Fanlore, and it's a lot easier to fix the occasional mistake than to add a draft of new guidelines to "protect" podfic pages from "vandalism".
no subject