This is the project discussion page for the Fanonbenders. This page acts as a discussion page for all ideas, projects and queries relating to the Fanonbenders, or general discussion between members. When proposing a new project, please ensure there is not an active project already running. Start a new heading and clearly outline the intent of the project, then leave it open for discussion.

Contents 1 Duplicate fanon pages 2 Low quality fanon tag? 3 Move fanon 4 Fanon 5 Past Masters 6 Hey 7 Message Notice 8 This fanon needs help. 9 Membership Requirements 10 Becoming more effective 11 New Approval Format 12 New Rules 13 New Duties 14 Review Index 15 Ways to Work As a Group 16 Just A Suggestion 17 Inactivity Policy 18 Addition 19 Resignation 20 File name 21 Membership requests tips 22 Fanon Writing 23 Suggestion to alert Fanonbenders faster 24 'Request for Membership' voting 25 News and updates 26 Fanon Portal 26.1 Fanonbending 26.2 Fanon Portal Slider 27 Advertising Contest

Duplicate fanon pages Edit

On using Special:Random/fanon, I found these two pages; Avatar Legend of Two, Book 1 Fire and Ice, Chapter 1 Two Avatars, and Avatar: Legend of Two. It is clear that both pages are completely the same. So what do you guys want to do? Rassilon ^{(Talk - Teru)} 07:18, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

I've deleted the one the without the red image links, there duplicates so it's an uneeded page basically. Carloso - Talk 20:39, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. I'll set to improving it soon. Rassilon ^{(Talk - Teru)} 09:38, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

Low quality fanon tag? Edit

So, I have been thinking, that for our own ease, we make a 'low quality fanon tag'. I have set up a draft in my sandbox, and I'd like to see what you think of it. I used the Dai Li as a subject, because I compare the Fanonbenders to them on the main page. So basically, it would be used by ourselves, and other fanon users, to mark pages which need improvement, so that we can easily run through the list of pages we need to fix up. I did search through piles of notice templates, but failed to find an already existent one. So, thoughts? Rassilon ^{(Talk - Teru)} 11:30, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

I think we should go back to the 'Fanonhelp' tag that we used to have. That way, pages that need help will be put into a category that can be easily accessed by any user who wants to help out. --I'm The Bos - ^{Talk - Guardian} 16:39, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I thought there was a tag like that when I was searching the pages. We should undelete it, definitely, then fanon policy might need some tweaking about moving low quality fanon pages to the user space. I do, however, think that under construction pages should remain in the userspace until finished. Of course, if the page requires more information, then the future template should be applied. In any case, the Needs Help (fanon) category needs to be remade, so that the tagged page is added to the category.

Now that I think of it, is there a page with guidelines on what tags need to be used, and where? Rassilon ^{(Talk - Teru)} 07:00, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

I agree, the fanon help template seems like the best idea rather than our current moving to userspace, since sometimes when we do move them to userspace, they remain un-edited. Also I don't think users should be able to 'hide behind' the FanonUC template like when we had the old system in, mainly because I've seen fanons with UC on that haven't bee touched in weeks. Carloso - Talk 15:03, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

I think the UC template should be deleted to be honest. It serves no point at all, except for exempting one's self from the policy. It has to go. Rassilon ^{(Talk - Teru)} 20:49, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

Any further thoughts? Rassilon ^{(Talk - Teru)} 11:00, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

Forum:Fanon Policy Changes - Carloso - Talk 11:41, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I don't know how I missed that... Rassilon ^{(Talk - Teru)} 12:47, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

Move fanon Edit

Can some of you guys move this fanon? I don't have the time to do that now. :| Renata ^Talk 03:44, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry Renata, but the Fanonbenders were made to prevent the dumping of fanon into the user space, and instead improving it. Thanks for the notice though. :) Rassilon ^{(Talk - Teru)} 06:44, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

I'd move it but with that discussion above, better to leave it until a decision is reached. Carloso - Talk 15:05, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

FanonEdit

This fanon needs to improve. :) – Natsu11 · (wall • Avatar Answers) 06:46, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

 Done - thanks for the notice Natsu. :) Rassilon ^{(Talk - Teru)} 08:45, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

Past Masters Edit

Hi Fanonbenders. Would you improve this fanon, please? Thanks. Dcasawang1 (talk) 05:04, July 4, 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I'll take a look at it now. :) Rassilon of Old ^{(Talk - Teru - Help)} 05:05, July 4, 2011 (UTC)

Hey Edit

Hey all, this is BM, the newest member of the Fanonbenders! - insert applause - First off, thanks to ARG for accepting me into the group. I am honored. I will get to work on the pages here soon. Just wondering, does this group have a userbox of any sort? - I can't seem to find one. Anyway, Is there any specific work you guys need me to do? Thanks again, BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 20:29, November 8, 2011 (UTC)

As you've seen in my userspace, the list of specific work is getting laid out. More is on its way. In the meantime, you can also suggest some fanons you think need improvement. We're getting a category soon, too. As for the userbox, as of now we don't have one. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 20:57, November 8, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks ARG. I'll start getting on that soon. And as my real first contribution to the group, I have created a userbox for us. Just copy and paste {{Fanonbender user}} onto your profile. --BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 21:59, November 8, 2011 (UTC)

Looks good to me. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 22:10, November 8, 2011 (UTC)

Message Notice Edit

I just set up our pages section and created a new category. I also went ahead and worked on one of the fanons in userspace. After I finished, I moved the fanon back to the fanonspace and sent a message to the author, telling them that their fanon had been successfully improved. Since we are working with a lot of userspace fanons, maybe we should have a standardized message to send to the authors once were done to let them know their fanon has been brought up to standard? --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 10:43, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. Like, a "Your fanon has been moved out of the userspace" notice? --BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 11:46, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

Hello, <your username>, this message is from the Avatar Wiki's Fanonbenders, a group of authors committed to constructively reformatting articles in the fanon namespace. As you may remember, a fanon article of yours, <fanon article name here>, was previously put into your userspace for construction. We, the Fanonbenders, have improved your article to meet the Fanon Policy and standards, and you may can now find your article <link to article> Now that it is back in and improved, you can continue adding and editing to it. BlackMonkey Talk - Rhythm 12:11, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

How about something like this? It's pretty basic, please help and change anything you feel is necessary or not necessary. Once you think it's good I can make a template for it. --BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 12:11, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

This looks fine to me. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 15:10, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

Hello, <your username>, in order to maintain a high quality of stories on Avatar Wiki, a fanon article of yours was previously moved to <User:Name of the user/name of the fanon> for construction. We have helped you improved the sophistication and quality of your article to meet our set fanon standards. Please take a look at the changes that have been made as something to keep in mind for the future and feel free to continue writing your story. If you are satisfied with the improvements and feel that the article is ready to be moved back to the fanon portal, feel free to contact a fanon administrator, who will check your article again. If standards have been sufficiently met, your article will then be moved back to its original title. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 18:17, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I know I'm not a member, but I've been doing some freelance fanon bender work, so chances are pretty realistic that I'll be using the template in the future, so I give my two cents as well :-) I merged the text we use on the fanon move template with the text ARG has left on Annmarie Wetnight's page and BM's suggestion. I removed any link to the Fanonbenders from the message because it will probably be used by other users as well. Everyone can improve low quality fanons without being a Fanonbender, so it might be nicer to have a general message instead of a general and a Fanonbender message. I've also changed the link that lead to the general FA page to the FA notice board. I think btw that that is something that might be done as well on the move template as it is easier for the user to leave a message on the FA board for every FA to see then on a talk page of and FA who might not be in at that moment. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 18:17, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

I like the changing the FA links to the FA noticeboard, but not the removing the link to the Fanonbenders. Even if someone else uses it, the Fanonbenders specialize in this, so having a link to them is good for the user if they have further inquiries. Also, the Fanonbenders would be using the template the most. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 19:53, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

At the same time, you want to be careful that the Fanonbenders do not appear to be taking over the role of F-Admins, and BM's original design makes it sort of appear that way, that only the F-Benders are the ones who are working to improve articles/fanon space. KataraFanboy Send me a messenger hawk Read my fanon! 20:15, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

Although the Fanonbenders will indeed be the ones using these messages the most, I still think that it should be more general like the fanon move message that can be used by anyone. People usually respond to the person leaving the message in the first place, not necessarily to the links that the message holds, so if the message is placed by a Fanonbender, that person will get a message, but if it's not placed by a Fanonbender, the non-Fanonbender will get the message, so by adding the link you, like KFB said, create the vibe that only Fanonbenders are improving articles. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 20:36, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

I've thought about it some and I think Lady Lostris has a point. The Fanonbenders make it their mission to work to improve the format and quality of fanon articles, but returning a page to the fanon portal from userspace is strictly a fanon admin task. We should use the template to send the message to the users informing them of our work and then they can leave a message on the FA noticeboard saying they want it moved back. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 21:00, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

Nyeh, I don't know. I feel like this is just making the Fanonbenders less and less significant. All fanonbenders besides me have been an FA at some point or are an FA currently, so I don't really see the point. @ Lady, I don't think that will be the vibe given at all. The Fanonbenders are for improving articles, and when we improve articles we should be the ones leaving the message afterwards. Stretching this group's goals out across the Fanonbenders, non-Fanonbenders, and Fanon admins alike would not only make things more complex, but we are the group to fix these things. If you are going to take credit and fix our articles, then there's nothing wrong with requesting to be a member, as the Fanonbenders are commited to improving fanon articles, especially articles which have been put into the userspace. To revise my original template, I'd just replace "We, the Fanonbenders, have improved your article to meet the Fanon Policy and standards" with "We have improved your article to meet the Fanon Policy and standards". --BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 20:36, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

The Fanonbenders may be a user group specifically designed to improve fanon articles, but that doesn't mean that they are the only ones that are allowed to "fix your articles." I don't see how non-Fanonbenders helping out complicates things, imo, that only makes things easier. I think it is much more professional and much more fair to use a general template that can be used by all the users on the wiki who felt like improving an article. These actions should in no way be restricted to the Fanonbenders, so I don't really see the need to specifically list this group and thus prevent the creation of a template that can be used by all for a task that can be done by all. (Just a random note, but what has "All fanonbenders besides me have been an FA at some point or are an FA currently" have to do with linking the Fanonbenders in the template?) Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 00:57, November 15, 2011 (UTC)

This fanon needs help. Edit

Hey guys, I stumbled upon this fanon article and it could really use some improvement. Omashu Rocks (talk-fanon-OSP) 22:07, November 11, 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps these notifications and reports should go to the Fanon Adminboard, since that is what it was designed for. :) Rassilon of Old ^{(Wall - Help)} 22:10, November 11, 2011 (UTC)

Alright. Sorry, I thought that's what the fanonbenders were for. I contacted the right people now. Omashu Rocks (talk-fanon-OSP) 22:17, November 11, 2011 (UTC)

Oh, no no no no no,the Fanonbenders ARE for that, BUT, the report should be made on the Fanon Adminboard, where FBenders can tackle it, or add it to their list of pages to be improved. :) Rassilon of Old ^{(Wall - Help)} 22:36, November 11, 2011 (UTC)

Membership Requirements Edit

Since we accept requests now, I think we should have a set of criteria to be allowed membership in the Fanonbenders. Here’s a rough list I came up with based on my thoughts and group requirements elsewhere on the wiki. Let me know what you guys think:

• Must be an active member for at least a month.
• Must have 150 edits in the fanon namespace. Comments do not count. And a significant number should be on fanons besides their own.
• It is preferred that they be a fanon author themselves. However, it is possible for someone to be a Fanonbender if they don’t have their own fanon, but edit extensively on other people’s fanons.
• If they do have a fanon, it must be high-quality, since this is the standard they hope to bring to others.--AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 01:20, November 15, 2011 (UTC)

They sound good, I'm happy with it. Rassilon of Old ^{(Wall - Help)} 05:36, November 15, 2011 (UTC)

:I like it, but... how is my fanon quality? Acer Indonesia Ask anything about fanon! • TCA:TFF 02:39, July 28, 2012 (UTC)

Becoming more effective Edit

I've had an idea which I think will not only give the Fanonbenders some direction, but also make them more effective. Each fortnight (or other specified time period) a particular fanon or fanon category is selected which will be targeted by the Fanonbenders to improve. For example, a category such as Category:BlackMonkey (fanon), and then anything that needs improvement will be improved, and then be listed on the project page.

Internally, we could have our own achievement system, rewarding the members that perform particularly well, and to create a bit or incentive in the form of friendly competition. In doing this, Avatar Wiki:Fanonbenders/Pages would be moved to Avatar Wiki:Fanonbenders/Projects, where each project would be outlined in detail, as well as a list of objectives which could be striked through once completed. What does everyone think? Rassilon of Old ^{(Wall - Help)} 05:34, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

I like that, Ras. I would make the Fanonbenders seem a little more. . . groupy. I think it would be kind of fun, and we would get to help fanons that need it. HenryJh 98 (talk • Avatar:The Sole Woodbender • Fanon Detective!) 13:05, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with this suggestion. It'd be a good way to organize, coordinate and keep track of our work. The Fire Sages concentrate their efforts to certain pages for a certain period of time. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 22:34, August 5, 2012 (UTC)

And this way we could help the fanon more if several minds are onto it. It would be like in cartoons when people come and just scrub whole buildings down in about twelve seconds because there are a billion of them XDHenryJh 98 (talk • Avatar:The Sole Woodbender • Fanon Detective!) 12:58, August 6, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Acer Indonesia Ask anything about fanon! • TCA:TFF 09:07, August 9, 2012 (UTC)

Definitely. A list of projects with different steps and tasks for us to take down is much easier and more effective than just telling us to fix up the fanon portal. Lets get started with it. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 11:29, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Also, one more idea, maybe we should just have this Projects page at the bottom of the Fanonbenders page. That way it's easier to see both for us and for the general community. I think it's nice for others to see what we're doing, that's what the Fire Sages do. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 11:47, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Sokka jr • Wall • Blogs• Fanon 23:47, August 24, 2012 (UTC)

So it sounds like we all agree on this, but how exactly are we going to organize it? Are we leaning more towards the contest method, with a list of articles to fix that would get us achievements if we helped them, or more towards how the Fire Sages do theirs, with one page or category that we would focus on helping for one week or so, or a combination of both? And how would we set them up? BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 13:31, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

New Approval Format Edit

Hey, Fanonbenders folks. I knew and I apologize if I am doing wrong, by approving several people's request.. I can't resist them! Just kidding. Well, I saw we are not effective by adding new members with only  Done and  Not done. When I heard ARG has an idea, I like it. Why not we re-format the step to be fanonbender by voting just like we did on "Adminship"? We can consider who's more effective to be a fanonbender and not. Just like what I did, it's only because my opinion, not ours. So, why not change the format? Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 13:32, August 21, 2012 (UTC)

Maybe. . . I'll wait and see what the others say. But I was looking through Minnichi's edits and most of them were for reviews or just her own fanon. . . HenryJh 98 (talk • Avatar:The Sole Woodbender • Fanon Detective!) 13:35, August 21, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, she is. She also decline it by chat. Anyway, This is also sounds good. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 13:37, August 21, 2012 (UTC)

We could move requests to a separate page and follow this format. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 16:34, August 21, 2012 (UTC)

I like yours, ARG. HenryJh 98 (Blogs • ATSW • FFF)

Agreed. I like both having a separate page for nominations and requests, and being able to discuss them as a group beforehand. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 11:33, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

That's what I mean, ARG. XD Could I create the page now? Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 12:26, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I think we've reached a consensus to go through with this. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 12:52, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

New Rules Edit

Hey, again. ^^"

I've a new idea for re-arrange the old rules. These are the old one:

• This user group improves only fanon portal articles. All canon articles are managed by the Fire Sages user group.
• All members should improve fanon articles, or mark them for improvement on the discussion page as a preference to moving articles to the respective author's user space.
• When reformatting a fanon page, please include "Fanonbender duties" in the edit summary followed by a list of major edits made, so as not to create confusion amongst the fanon community as to why you're editing other users' articles.

My new idea:

• All members ought to often check the talk page and membership requests page.
• This user group improves only fanon portal articles. All canon articles are managed by the Fire Sages user group.
• All members should improve fanon articles, or mark them for improvement on the discussion page as a preference to moving articles to the respective author's user space.
• All members should improve fanon articles in one, large edit instead of multiple minor edits.
• All members who're don't follow the rule, must be removed from the user group.

And, in membership requests page, we must leave a comment, 3 members in minimum. If (at least) 3 members are give a support, the request should be approved; I mean, he/she counted. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 06:51, September 1, 2012 (UTC)

I fully support the new rules. Sokka jr • Wall • Blogs• Fanon 02:02, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

Sure. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 13:21, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

However I don't think the fanonbender duties bullet needs to deleted, that's fairly important so other's know what were doing, and it's something we need to get more in the habit of doing. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 00:00, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

Lostris told me, that "Fanonbender duties" is irrelevant. :\ Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 11:08, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

No, I told you that the edits you were make -applying the main space format to the fanon portal- was unneeded and irrelevant, and I also told you that when you change something it is better to state what you changed than to state "fanonbender duties" as the majority has no idea what the fanonbenders are and what their duties are. So if you're going to quote me, please do it correctly and say what I actually said and not something random, thank you. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 11:20, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

That's why I propose to delete it, Lady. ;) Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 14:16, September 3, 2012 (UTC)

New Duties Edit

So, regarding this forum, it has been mandated that we add new duties to our list, including updating featured fanons (writing the FFS and FFA descriptions as well), looking after Fanonbending, updating the Fanon Advertisement System, updating the review index and anything of similar nature that falls under the general fanon sphere without someone else to watch over it. It has also been suggested by some that we hold elections for our members from now on, though that part is not mandatory.

How should we go about incorporating this into our group's mission? Should we rewrite the top section of our page? --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 17:30, October 2, 2012 (UTC)

I would suggest re-writing our mission statement, so that all of our duties are clearly stated. Sokka jr • Wall • Blogs• Fanon 17:45, October 6, 2012 (UTC)

Agree; and I think we should separate our duties. Example:

• Minnichi will updates the review index
• ARG will updates the main page
• Acer will updates the news/update central
• Henryjjh98 will updates the featured fanon votes and archive
• BM will updates FAS
• Sokka jr will updates the Fanonbending

Just an example, let's discuss this now. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 08:39, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

I think a rewrite of our group's mission is a good idea. However, I don't think we should leave any duties to specific members. Allowing everyone to have the same responsibilities creates a much higher chance that those things will actually be carried out. We all have busy times sooner or later, and leaving anything entirely dependent on one member isn't such a great idea to me. If something is neglected, any observant member can always tell another to go check on it if he/she cannot. I'm pretty sure this group contains observant members, on that note, so leaving free-for-all duties should work in my opinion. --Minnichi 09:21, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Going with Minnichi's comment, leaving each user with specific duties isn't the best idea. You never know when you, or another member will be too busy to come on the wiki. I think that we need free for all duties, on a task chart. That way we can log when one of the tasks listed above by Acer is completed. Sokka jr • Wall • Blogs• Fanon 20:07, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

I see. So, who will rewrite the statement? ;) Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 10:02, October 9, 2012 (UTC)

(Crickets chirping in background) ...I'll take this as an offer for anyone to step up. I would've said to wait for the opinions of the other members, but the top section does need to be fixed anyway since our duties/purpose have changed. Don't all rush at once, now :P I guess I'll go look... --Minnichi 20:22, October 10, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I took a shot at rewriting. Actually took me a while... x_x What do you guys think? Feel free to edit as necessary! --Minnichi 21:40, October 10, 2012 (UTC)

Nice going, Minnichi! I fixed a typo and added a couple links. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 22:18, October 10, 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, new guy agrees. New guy also feels kinda bad that he's the reason all these new responsibilities exist in the first place… Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 00:24, October 11, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! And hey, I like the new duties haha. Many of us were unofficially/randomly updating those things for a while and I think it's nice that it's set in stone now. --Minnichi 08:59, October 11, 2012 (UTC)

So now that we've re-written our duties on the main page, should we make a weekly task chart so we all know what needs to be done for the week? I'm not saying that we should assign specific task to each other, but rather just have a list to reference so we know what has been recently updated on the portal. Sokka jr • Wall • Blogs• Fanon 03:52, October 12, 2012 (UTC)

That could be helpful, like when we had the checklist when we reorganized the fanon portal. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 03:54, October 12, 2012 (UTC)

Alright then, so I guess now we need to decide what should be on the checklist. Heres a start.

• Update the review index
• Update the main page
• Update the news/update central
• Update the featured fanon votes and archive
• Update FAS
• Update Fanonbending

Sokka jr • Wall • Blogs• Fanon 19:47, October 12, 2012 (UTC)

Should I pick these onto the main page of Fanonbenders? Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 08:35, October 13, 2012 (UTC)

Review IndexEdit

Here's what we need to update the Review index. The review index was created on January 11, 2012, so everything up until that point is accounted for. Some of the reviews since then are on there, but not all of them. Here is a link to a page that lists all blogs in the review category. The ones that need to be accounted for start after January 11th, which is currently page 13. This does not include BSST issues (issue 39 and onward) and WLS issues. Keep in mind also that some of these blogs and newsletters have more than one review on them. Once we're caught up to the present, we can update the index as need be, but first we have to fill in the nine months between today and January. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 21:12, October 13, 2012 (UTC)

I'll do my best. :D Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 07:20, October 14, 2012 (UTC)

Ways to Work As a GroupEdit

Okay, I think that we as a usergroup need to come up with a way to work as a group and improve the fanon portal alot in a short amount of time. There has been some words directed at us for not ever doing anything as a group, so we need to do something together. The question is, how do we do this? I really don't have an idea, and that' s why I am asking you for your ideas and thoughts. So, ideas and thoughts? 22:22, October 23, 2012 (UTC)

I had to look at the edit history but I think Henry posted this, right? Hmmm...so far I don't have many ideas on how to work as a group either, but I'll just throw one out here for now. Do you think that we would work better together if we had a sort of noticeboard on this page? Perhaps there could be a section where every member of the group lists anything that needs editing or updating but that they can't take care of right away. This way, the member who originally posted can have it in their plans, but at the same time anyone else in the group who sees the post can take care of it first. Then every notice that's taken care of can be marked by the {done} template. I just thought maybe this system could make needed edits happen faster, since they'll be done by the first person who sees the notice and has time... Thoughts? --Minnichi 03:23, October 25, 2012 (UTC)

Maybe we could make this our noticeboard, since it's still around and it's not being used much. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 03:30, October 25, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 10:49, October 25, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it was me. For some reason my signature did not show up. Odd. That seems like a good idea, Minn and ARG. HenryJh 98 (Blogs • ATSW • Parallel) 01:02, October 26, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that noticeboard could work. Just one thing, dyou think we should archive/collapse the old posts, since they're so many of them? Then we can kind of start new and not have to scroll so much to see the latest issues lol --Minnichi 01:10, October 26, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Archiving would be a good idea. In addition, we could have a list of some long-term goals or tasks somewhere like a checklist for the group - either under a separate subpage or on this talk page would suffice. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 01:59, October 26, 2012 (UTC)

 Done --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 16:42, October 29, 2012 (UTC)

Just A SuggestionEdit

I know it's not my usergroup or anything, but the fanonbending usergroup image is kind of misleading. The picture of the Dai Li, the group the betrayed their own country, is on their page. It says they keep order of the fanon wiki. In the series, the Dai Li's version of "order" is to seperate the poor from the rich. That could be thought of as seperate the popular fanons from the not so popular. I was just wondering if the picture could be looked over again and be changed.--Snip101 author of Love in a Parallel Universe 02:28, November 23, 2012 (UTC)

Not to get into detailed discussion of the show or anything, but the Dai Li's duties were not to separate the poor from the rich; they worked more to censor anything related to the war with the Fire Nation. While Ba Sing Se did separate the poor from the rich, that wasn't a direct result of the Dai Li, but more of a long problem with the city's traditions (which once led to a revolt against the Earth King, which actually led to the creation of the Dai Li)...well, I'm getting off-topic at this rate xD Anyhow, I never saw the image as something that favors popular fanons with that in mind. Seeing as the Dai Li mainly censored things, I would actually think it's fitting to assign the image to a group that works to keep bad quality out of the fanon portal and to improve them with good edits as needed. Perhaps the purpose of the censoring wasn't a great one in the show, but it does match us in the sense of working towards a particular kind of quality... Point being, I didn't find the image questionable at all. But well, I could be biased because of obvious reasons heheh. Thoughts anyone? --Minnichi 04:40, November 23, 2012 (UTC)

Nice theory. XD The current image represent of the first-creation Dai Li duty; keep the cultural heritage of the city, which is refer to Fanon Portal on this time. The unbalancing things on Ba Sing Se are out of the Dai Li, but about Long Feng. But I have some points that also agree with Snip, maybe we can create image just like FRS have. Just my two cents. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 16:14, November 24, 2012 (UTC)

I honestly don't believe that the average user would associate a Dai Li image with 'imbalance' between popular and unpopular fanons just because it happens to be assigned to a usergroup ^^" If anything, only users who look into the organization way too deeply like me would have a higher chance of assigning such theories. For the most part however, I would think that the average user would just see the obvious and broad traits of the Dai Li: that they're a very organized group who work in the background, and that they fix anything as needed in their city. In that broad sense, isn't that kind of the vibe we're going for...? But aside from my possibly biased opinions as a Dai Li fan, I'll have to point out once again that their main duties were not to separate the rich from the poor, at least not from what we've most commonly seen in the show. (Which kind of invalidates the popular/unpopular fanon theory) ^^ --Minnichi 22:36, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I disagree. Most people wouldn't think that just by looking at the picture. The Dai Li's job was to protect the city of Ba Sing Se, and I think most of them believed what they were doing was right (excluding Yuhan XD). We, the Fanonbenders, are dedicated to protecting the fanon of our wiki and keep it neat, organized, and attractive. We are the Dai Li of the Fanon Portal, the Dai Li that Kyoshi created. HenryJh 98 (Blogs • ATSW • Parallel) 23:21, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Inactivity Policy Edit

In order to be an effective member of a usergroup, you have to be around and able to contribute. I'm not trying to point fingers here, but I think it's time we did something like other usergroups do and create a policy on inactivity and membership. We have a mention of this in our rules, but it'd help to have a standard. I think three months is more than enough. It's what we use for user rights. If it's been three months there's no real reason to list someone as a member of the group (no disrespect to anyone.)

My proposal is thus: we allow for three months of activity, but no one as of today will be considered inactive for more than two months. This allows members time to become active again if they choose to. In other words, no one would be removed until a month from now. If we have some openings we could think of how to fill them when it gets to that.

Thoughts? --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 00:08, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

I agree that we should follow suit of the other groups and establish a standard. I would say that three months is very generous indeed… a little too generous perhaps. That may be what the Wiki holds for user rights, but I would argue that special groups like this should hold a higher standard. In my view, two months is fine. That being said, I'm not going to fight anyone over this; three months is fine.

I have one question: does "activity" mean any editing at all or just edits to help fanons? Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 03:20, November 27, 2012 (UTC)

We were just tackling this issue for the FRS too, in which we decided that two months would be the limit. I agree that three months is a little long, but it's not a big deal as long as we actually establish a standard. For now though, how do you think this should be addressed to the current inactive members? Or do we just notify them and wait a month before deciding on any removal? --Minnichi 08:53, November 27, 2012 (UTC)

I'd say we let them know in a message. It sounds appropriate and it only takes a few seconds. Two months does seem fair enough. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 23:46, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Support. And 2 months are only for fanon portal edits, agreee? Per my proposal below:

Sokka jr, one of our best friend sent his resignation message hours ago. I can't say anything except farewell, and I have an opinion about adding one more rule: If within 2 months, fanonbenders didn't do any edits within fanon portal, the user must revoked. I don't offend everyone for being active, but let's make this simple: Rass, The Bos, and Unnamed Airbender are all gone now. Maybe back sometimes later, but just like rollback, we need more tighter rule. Sokka jr also resigned, so I think they must request and show their qualities if they want the seat on Fanonbenders once again. No offense to everyone, Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 14:53, December 6, 2012 (UTC)

I have an amendment to the rule that I think we could use. Say a user suddenly needs to disappear for a time period of 8 weeks (two months). Perhaps they can leave a notification on this page for a temporary leave of absence? I believe that since we'd be notified, it's different than simply being lazy and not editing… Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 05:49, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

That's fine with me. However much leeway is given should be decided case-by-case. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 17:57, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

Alright then. I'd like to motion that we adopt a new rule that automatically removes Fanonbenders who have not edited fanons other than their own for two straight months, given that they did not warn us before-hand of an extenuating circumstance. Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 01:19, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

I don't agree with that. They have all been active in the past, and they didn't know about this before, as there was no such policy. Maybe a month is a little long, though. How about we compromise at 2 weeks? --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 03:01, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

Wait, I thought I was just restating what we all agreed on. I don't understand what I said that you don't agree with. Do you mean the people on the current inactive list? I wasn't referring to them. Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 03:13, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, my bad. I thought you wee referring to the current inactive members. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 03:38, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

No worries. So do we all agree? Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 19:16, December 15, 2012 (UTC)

Addition Edit

I think that their should be another user added, me. I would basically create another... duty to the usergroup. I would make an A-class and B-class heading and it would be just like how the Standards Council would do it. I could even make a heading for A-class and B-class authors and A-class and B-class editor (we could even give them a userbox and there would be a nominations sub-heading). Then, whatever articles that do get promoted would get an A-class or B-class icon on their main page. I could take care of all of this and be part of the usergroup if you accept. Note: I would not have any powers to any other duties than these.

If this works we could make two subcategories, one named A-class fanons, the other, B-class fanons. This is just an idea that I think would be very effectove for those who would like to find a new fanon to read.--Snip101 author of Love in a Parallel Universe 03:38, December 1, 2012 (UTC)

This would actually (and ironically) start a separation of 'popular' and 'unpopular' fanons, which is not the aim of our group. The goal of improving fanons is to make them more likely to attract readers, and assigning A-class and B-class labels is sending a message that a certain group of fanons are higher-quality and basically 'better' than another. It's best to allow readers to keep an open mind and to give every fanon an equal chance. Aside from being extremely subjective, marking which fanons are 'better' than others is not a good way to go. With that in mind, I strongly believe that this should not be considered for our duties. I do sincerely thank you for your suggestions, though. --Minnichi 22:42, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with Minnichi. There is no need for this type of classification. Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 22:49, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Per those two. It'd make others feel bad if their fanons didn't have an class heading. That's what the Featured Fanon is for. HenryJh 98 (Blogs • ATSW • Parallel) 23:12, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the general sentiment here. This group is geared toward making fanon stories and the fanon portal as a whole high quality. It's not about assigning ranks or evaluating individual stories. We already have featured fanons, fanonbending and the FRS for that. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 23:43, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I agree per everyone. ARG implies everything. We are working to improve the quality, but I don't think we need any Fanon Council only for scoring. We have Fanon Review Squad for scoring, but I can't say fanons with score 6 and lower are bad. It's should improved. And I bet people will have same mind with me: I can't separate the fanon quality. Everything have two-side, shortage and advantage. Sorry, Snip. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 09:53, December 4, 2012 (UTC)

Resignation Edit

Sokka jr, one of our best friend sent his resignation message hours ago. I can't say anything except farewell, and I have an opinion about adding one more rule: If within 2 months, fanonbenders didn't do any edits within fanon portal, the user must revoked. I don't offend everyone for being active, but let's make this simple: Rass, The Bos, and Unnamed Airbender are all gone now. Maybe back sometimes later, but just like rollback, we need more tighter rule. Sokka jr also resigned, so I think they must request and show their qualities if they want the seat on Fanonbenders once again. No offense to everyone, Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 09:53, December 4, 2012 (UTC)

We're already talking about this two topics up. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 05:36, December 6, 2012 (UTC)

Whoops, didn't see that. >.< *flashes upward* Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 14:53, December 6, 2012 (UTC)

File name Edit

Hey guys. I just think (and Minnichi agreed) that we can create a file name for FAS, featured article and series, so the image will be more proportional (and we can save the number of unused images, imo) The file will be: FASlider.png for the fortnightly fanon promotion, and FFASlider.png will be the featured fanon article, and FFSlider.png will be the featured fanon series. Thoughts? Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 09:05, December 7, 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure there already are ones for Featured Fanon and Featured Article, but one for FAS would be good. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 14:28, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

We had that before. When I was doing all the regular updates it took a while for the changed image to show up. The only way to speed up the process was to add a new image in. Either way though, we wouldn't really save space on image uploads because the images are all shown by the fanons they represent on the list of past featured articles. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 17:55, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for remind me, ARG. Really, I forgot that archive. >.< But about altering the image for a better proportion, what do ya think? And also about the "FASlider.png"? You can see the file here. But I'm still blind to the copyrights, so, help, anybody? Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 11:37, December 10, 2012 (UTC)

Membership requests tips Edit

Hey guys. I think we should reconstruct our appliances page, and I have an idea to write tips before send a request. I noticed that the users recently applied are not bad users, they have a good contributions in Fanon Portal. But they didn't qualify our main focus, so I think we should retell them so they could examine themselves. I have a similar box like Fire Sages have, so credits to Fire Sages. Fixes are accepted; thoughts? Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 04:17, December 8, 2012 (UTC)

Looks good with me. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 14:28, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that'd probably be a good reference for new applicants. --Minnichi 20:53, December 10, 2012 (UTC)

We need Henry, OR, and ARG's thoughts.. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 09:29, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

Fanon Writing Edit

Hey guys, sorry for popping-up through 3 new section, but all of these are different case. This time, I want to ask you what do you think about changing the writing on Fanon at the main page for Discontinued fanon, let me gives example:

FANON NAME was a fanon stories written by USERNAME. It chronicles bla.. bla.. As you know, the discontinued story is discontinued, so it should written in past tense. I know I'm stupid in English, so I need your thoughts. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 13:38, December 8, 2012 (UTC)

Are you proposing that we rewrite discontinued fanons in past tense? I'm a little unclear of what you're trying to say. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 14:30, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, sorry for the confusion. Yes, I propose that we should rewrite discontinued fanons in past tense. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 14:31, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

Not a bad thought, but I think it might be a little too much work than its worth - there's a lot of discontinued fanons out there. Plus I don't think we're really supposed to be changing the actual content of fanons, more just the grammar and formatting. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Rhythm} 14:35, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

I don't think this should be a priority of ours. Our mission is more geared to improving the quality of fanons in general. The template already indicates that the story is discontinued. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 17:51, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 11:37, December 10, 2012 (UTC)

Per ARG and BM, I don't think it's necessary to change stories to past tense. To me that's sort of an edit against the author's permission, since using present tense is based on preference and doesn't count as a grammar/formatting mistake. --Minnichi 20:51, December 10, 2012 (UTC)

Closed. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 09:29, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion to alert Fanonbenders faster Edit

I'm not sure if I read somewhere that this is technically a requirement (I might be getting it mixed up with the FRS), but I feel like many of our active members here don't see the new topics on the talk page right away. Instead of notifying them to check or waiting for them to see the changes, do you think we should stress for all members to follow this page? I'm thinking that the delays that last more than a few days come up because some of us aren't notified by email. Just a thought... --Minnichi 21:04, December 10, 2012 (UTC)

I suppose the delay to respond to this offers further evidence in support of your motion. I agree. Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 19:17, December 15, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's a good idea, as we can see here. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 02:27, January 5, 2013 (UTC)

'Request for Membership' voting Edit

After speaking with Minnichi, we have thought of an amendment to the current way we vote to accept or deny requests for membership. The way it is now, the voting ends 24 hours after the last vote, no matter how many members have not voted. According the rule, if half of the members who made the deadline support, they are accepted, but if half are opposed, they are rejected. Think about that. If half support, then obviously half oppose… It just doesn't make sense. We are proposing the following rules:

• Members will have 3 weeks after the application, rather than 24 hours after the last vote, to cast their vote.
• If an applicant receives a support vote from the majority of members at any point, they are accepted.
• If all members vote or the deadline has passed and the vote is tied, the applicant is rejected.

Thoughts? Omashu Rocks/sig 02:21, March 18, 2013 (UTC)

I'm all for this proposal. The current rules probably aren't even valid, considering that Acer wrote them without any supports from the others. But 24 hours is definitely too short to just count everyone who hasn't voted out of the decision; 3 weeks seems more suitable. And I most strongly agree with the tie rule; it'd make more sense to accept a fanonbender under majority, and it's the most community-like way of handling the decision. I think these rules should be official because they ensure the most fair participation from current members when it comes time to decide on a new fanonbender. Not to mention we need an official set of rules since the current is kind of invalid... --Minnichi 03:51, March 18, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with pretty much everything, but I think three weeks is too long. I don't think any more than two weeks should be needed for the simple evaluation and voting on a given application. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 05:49, March 18, 2013 (UTC)

I also suggested 2 weeks at first, but we realized that many school breaks tend to last for 2 weeks at a time. A user could be on vacation without wiki access during that period, so that's how it became 3. But I'm fine with either one, honestly. --Minnichi 15:32, March 18, 2013 (UTC)

I too agree with all of this, but three weeks is definitely too long. How about 10 days? That's a good amount of time. Not quite two weeks, but more than one full week, because I think two weeks is also a little too long. HenryJh 98 (Blogs • ATSW • Parallel) 21:50, March 18, 2013 (UTC)

I will come down to two weeks. Can we agree on that and everything else so we can make this a rule as soon as possible? Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 00:06, March 19, 2013 (UTC)

I'm settling for two weeks as well. So, this makes a majority agreement on the rules and time limits. Are we good?
--Minnichi 00:58, March 19, 2013 (UTC)

If indeed we do all agree, I'd like to propose a second idea. We should start voting in private, via email. The way it is now, outsiders, including the applicant, can argue our votes and disturb the application process. Doing this via email would eliminate that unnecessary frustration. All we'd have to do would be to pick one person to email all of our votes, and maybe the grand vote recipient and tallier could rotate each time or something. Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 02:04, March 19, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with all of you. I'm sorry for creating the rule without permission from all of us Fanonbenders. And also I would like to apologize because I went inactive all in sudden without saying any word, and just let the Fanon Portal barren. I'm sorry. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 08:41, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

News and updates Edit

It looks like this page is outdated and nobody take a care about it. I have two ideas, to:

1. Delete the page because there is no any rule that manage that page. We don't have standard for that page, so delete it. Moreover, almost all of the fanons there are discontinued and finished, or...
2. Re-design the page, update and give advertisement on both WLS and BSST about it for a constant time. And also, of course, adding standards for news and updates. It could be have at least 5 chapters written, or it's unfinished etc. Thoughts, guys? Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 08:41, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

The page itself had an alright purpose, it's just that we stopped updating it and the format got kind of screwy due to being cluttered with different fanons, most of which had different formats. If we were to resurrect the page, it would look a lot cleaner if it was more standardized with similar formatting. Of course, that's tricky to do unless the authors themselves resolve to use similar formats, which many might not want to do. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 23:39, May 9, 2013 (UTC)

Fanon Portal Edit

Hey guys, just want to propose two things as we know today is the first day of May:

1. We start to arguing all-about Fanon Awards councilship, as I saw the notice that the request will be opened in May. E-mailings could be the best for now.
2. Give the Fanon Sub Module page link to the Fanon Portal main page. Maybe it's uncommon and rarely seen active page, and not every fanon authors could use that, but it's hard to find it and the link will be a great navigation.

And to sum up that those proposals above (not these two, but the News and updates, Notice, etc etc.) need consensus as some Fanonbenders didn't give their votes. Thanks. Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 13:37, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

---

Fanonbending Edit

Another proposal, please reply; The fanonbending image has been barren for a month I think, no active nomination, no active voting session. This might help people to have attention to the page if we change the setting: The archived nomination is only the voting supports, the nomination words aren't included. I mean, look at Moon Drops. It has archived voting phase one and open voting phase two, but the nomination stays unarchived. It could help people read the compliment easier, perhaps. . . Thoughts? Acer Evan ( Contributions · Fanonbenders · ) 12:37, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

What Acer means is that we should be consistent and have all nominated fanons adapt the same format as Moon Drops on that page. If you look, you'll see that the little introductory paragraph written by the very first nominator stays visible above all the voting. Not all fanons have this, and for many you'll simply see a bunch of collapsed completed nominations beneath the header. I agree that each fanon, including the fanonbending-master status ones, should have this little snippet of info at the top. It gives a better feel for the overall voting with that little intro, as opposed to just collapsed votes. So I'm all for this proposal. --Minnichi 12:56, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

I'm all for consistency. Plus, activity has suffered a decline on that page this year. If people are going there for the first time, the first nomination of a fanon is a lot more to go off of than simply the title of the fanon, so I support. Also, whether or not they vote, they may decide to read the fanon itself, which is another plus. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 14:14, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out Acer. I agree with the majority here (that really doesn't happen to often) and I don't have much too add. I think this new system could win the nominated fanons an extra reader or two, like ARG mentioned. Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 01:00, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

Per everyone. The nomination should be seen so people can try and not say the exact same thing as the nominator. HenryJh 98 (Blogs • ATSW • Parallel) 21:40, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

 Done Acer Evan ( Contributions · Fanonbenders · ) 14:58, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Fanon Portal Slider Edit

I'd like to propose for change the image of the current slider image,File:Sozin's Comet Slider.png to another one. It's not flawed, and nothing is wrong with the current image. But it stands for nothing, it can't represent the Fanon Portal well, imo. So, I think we should change the current image to this image, let me give the explanation: The proposed image is taken from Sokka's Master episode where Sokka was learning how to write properly with Master Piandao. He readying himself to write, though later the result is randomly poor, but the screenshot can -though not perfect- represent the Fanon Portal well. Any opinions, thoughts, or new image proposal will be appreciated. Acer Evan ( Contributions · Fanonbenders · ) 15:37, May 18, 2013 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree with the proposed change. I think the current one represents Aang looking out into the distance, unsure of what's awaiting him or the challenges he will face. It represents the mystery the huge world involved in writing. When one writes, he/she is exploring a massive, often unfamiliar world with unpredictable hurdles to jump over. In reading, one knows just where they will end up or what they will discover. For that reason, I think the current image perfectly illustrates what the fanons on our portal are all about. Omashu Rocks (Angkara - Political Animals - WLS) 19:12, May 19, 2013 (UTC)

Per OR, who summed it up beautifully. I personally like the current image because to me, it represents imagination very well. It really gives off the "possibilities are endless" vibe that characterizes story, and a technical picture of someone literally writing has less life to it and comes across more as academic. The current picture captures the creative aspect of writing, which is what separates our fanon portal content from the rest of the wiki articles. --Minnichi 01:30, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

I also disagree per OR and Minnichi. The proposed image isn't bad, and we could always hold onto it in case we later find something it's suited for, but as far as the whole fanon portal goes, I prefer the vibe of the unexplored world of creativity than something focusing on the mere act of writing. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 14:15, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

Advertising Contest Edit

Hi! I want to write a response for Changing fates, but the submissions page is still on the previous promoted fanon. When do you plan to change the page?

TheLoKnessmonster 22:03, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

 Done. Sorry for the lateness, I didn't notice that page that fast. ^^" Acer Evan Seek anything about fanon! 10:06, May 8, 2013 (UTC)