I've looked over the sources swiftly. Many of them seem fine. Certain statements that use multiple examples to seemingly "prove" their validity need to be worded differently or use a different source. Such as "While most of this fan-created art is distributed through nonprofessional media[< need source here], such as personal websites,[12][13][14][< these are just links to personal websites] some is published in anthologies, by Amateur Press Associations, or in APAzines.[15]" There are some weaselly statements here and there as well. Nothing that can't be fixed reasonably though. My concern is finding good sources on the more recent history of the fandom.