Talk:Star Trek fan productions/Archive 1

message: Created this article as a split from Star Trek, other storylines as a copy and paste of the existing material on my second go. Added the opening paragraph - pretty lame, eh? - just in case that was why it didn't 'take' last time. proposed development of article ...
#Add all known fan films and audio dramas within the categories shown
#Add sections for
##VR (Virtual Reality) animations with subcategories for ...
###Stop motion 
###Sim movies
###Flash
###Machinima
###CGI Animation
##Web Comics
##Computer Games with subcategories for ...
###Half-Life
###Star Trek: Elite Force
###Unreal Tournament 2004
###Freeware (ie others)
##Skills and crafts with subcategories for ...
###Card modelling
Sections that I can forsee need elaboration that I could use help with are fan fiction (the episodic series would be a subset of this I believe), RPGs, 3D Chess, card or board games (if there are any) or anything I've missed.
Basically my purpose here is to show the breadth and and creativity of fans; how it has become a subculture, with its own works of art and literature by the common man.--Kirok 05:31, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article created 

message: "... for an overview article, which is what this one should be, we simply cannot list everything."
TheRealFennShysa has stated several times that this article cannot be comprehensive and from a writer's viewpoint I must ask why? Because the subject is too large and would make the article too long? What constitutes too long? I can't find any guidelines for this so we'll do a bit of comparison.
The "List of Star Trek novels" is just over 900 lines and 5000 words although admittedly this is a "list" article. "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" is a mixture of text and tables and weighs in at 567 lines and 6499 words. By comparison at the moment we have 326 lines and 3723 words. Using this as a criteria we could nearly double it in scroll length and word count so article size is not an issue. I believe we could quite even cover most of the contested fan films as well. 
What are our options?
*The RFS has suggested that we make a seperate article that is a comprehensive list - like The "List of Star Trek novels" - and this has its merits. It might not be particularly stylish or atractive but it is comprehensive and useful, especially for the fan who wants to follow up on a fanchise by seeing every one of their episodes. One would assume that this is in addition to this article which will be an overview article.
*Take Carlos' advice and make separate articles for fan fiction and fan films. Fan films alone is so far 233 lines & 2619 words, 40% of the size of the "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" article, so that article size is even less of an issue for saying that it can't be comprrehensive. I would suggest making fan films, fan audio dramas & fan fiction separate articles and link them from the original "Star Trek, other storylines" article.
*Taking things to the next level would mean making individual articles for each of the fanchises - this has been done already with Star Trek: New Voyages, Star Trek: Hidden Frontier etc. In fact if you were to follow the format used in the Movie project you would have articles for individual films! If Netwriter wanted to create an article on the Redshirt Filmette Series, that would be up to him. 
*Having individual articles for each fanchise would mean that there would be no need to be too exhaustive about the summary information given in the Trek fan film article, so that entries in this article could be proportional to their significance or if you will, notability. This would mean that for example <gentle irony>a "major project" such as Stone Trek could have a much larger entry than the merely "notable" Starship Exeter</gentle irony> - I still can't believe you did that! Perhaps its because they haven't done a Star Wars crossover?
I think separating the articles will be the best compromise by making space available to do a comprehensive survey of fanfilms with enough info so that the reader can draw general conclusions about the genre. A view, I might point out that is suggested by Wikipedia for Long article layout. The RFS, can you give us any specific reasons why this article cannot be comprehensive?--Kirok 14:40, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Summary or Comprehensive Article