An Archive Of Our Own is open

[icarus]

The beta version of An Archive Of Our Own is open!

And it's opening on schedule. Color me impressed.

Also open: Fanlore, which is associated with An Archive Of Our Own.

Comments

[sinick.livejournal.com]

Who do we nag with feedback/bugs?

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I would go here:

http://community.livejournal.com/otw_news/

:)

[princessofg.livejournal.com]

i'm amazed at the tagging function. it will be like LJ and delicious and recs lists in one.

*ponders*

[sinick.livejournal.com]

Thanks a lot! I just left a nice long whinge feedback.

The second gateway.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I left long detailed feedback about the recs list section.

We definitely need it to default to sorting by reccer (that's how we look for rec lists in fandom).

The recs need to not be listed on the author profile -- if they have a lot of fics the recs will be buried at the bottom of a hundred stories -- but open on a different page by reccer.

To help newbies sort the "people who rec hundreds of fics" from the occasional reccer (the hobbyist as it 'twere), I think there should be a count of recs next to the member name, and we should be able to sort by number of recs (like the "popular bookmarks" feature in delicious). We can't qualify who has the best recs, but we can quantify who puts in the time to rec fics for fandom. It will reward those folks who put in the reading time for all of us.

Lastly, that description field for the rec needs to be bigger that what you see on delicious, because the best reccers write a paragraph about the fic, like this (http://regan-v.livejournal.com/58513.html), or this (http://thefourthvine.livejournal.com/90602.html).

Then our archive will totally top delicious. Having a bigger description field will totally get me to use the Archive instead of delicious.

The Recs section is important.

Recs are the second gateway into fandom. Our archive will have so many fics it will be like the books are on the floor (in neat piles by fandom and author, yet, still, on the floor).

The recs section is where people will go next. The doorway to good fic (at least according to the reccer).

How many people have open up ff.net, picked a fic at random, and decided fanfic is terrible?

The Recs section is how we can avoid that.

Re: The second gateway.

[princessofg.livejournal.com]

you are wise, my queen.

[mad_maudlin]

This is such a cool idea, but at the same time, I don't know if I really want to re-upload all my fic to yet another archive...how the hell did I manage to write so damn much? ::ponders::

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I think this will be the central archive. I certainly hope so.

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

They're also working on a hoovering feature; I am awaiting this as a person who has 215 stories and counting. *g*

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

I read something that made me think of you vis a vis Fanlore--you ought totally to get your "yearlong impressions" post into the wiki somehow; I mean, those are totally snapshots of fandom that will get lost in time if not documented, and yet totally give the impression of what it was like to be in a fandom if you were there. Just a thought! (And no, I'm not sure how to do it, actually; maybe add a year by year section into SGA?)

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Okay, good idea. I don't know how to make them subpages, but I've started the process here: 2006 (http://fanlore.org/wiki/Stargate_Atlantis/2006_Fanfic)

And here: Stargate Atlantis (http://fanlore.org/wiki/Stargate_Atlantis#Stargate_Atlantis_Fandom)

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

And I'm almost immediately getting shit for it.... (http://fanlore.org/wiki/Talk:Stargate_Atlantis/2006_Fanfic)

I can edit the article down to a more wiki-friendly version, but I don't have the time, energy, or patience for any wiki battles. I'd rather not edit the Fanlore at all if it's anything at all like editing wikipedia.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I've gone in and put in just the canon synopsis. Anyone who wants to add analysis can do that now. Anything that requires heavy editing will have to wait. *shrugs*

Sorry!!!

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

Oooops!I went afk for dinner and look what happens! Ididn't mean to give you any grief; I'm not sure about how such a thing gets integrated. I know there IS a distinction between information and meta; I'll ask around about how best to get the salient parts in (and I can probably help!)

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

Aaaaand I see what's happened; yes, you can't post "complete" meta essays to the wiki. I think either it needs to be linked out to in a section that's like, yearly fannish roundups, or you do what you've done, which is to make your essay into a basis that other people can engage with and change.

I guess it's really up to you: whether you mind people intervening and adding to your ideas; if you do, we can probably get the page deleted and just link out to the essay on LJ as it stands. Again, sorry for the trouble all around--I *said* I didn't know how to do it! *g*)

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I *said* I didn't know how to do it! *g*

Neither did I. Folks jumped on me a little hard here, there's a learning curve for everyone after all, but I'm perfectly cool with people adding to a version of the essay. I've always wanted it to include Het and other realms of fandom I didn't know.

I've created a new version that should function as a good starting place.

I've also reminded my friends on the discussion page of two Wiki principles: "Assume Good Faith" and "Please Do Not Bite The Customers." *g* I'm not as delicate as some, but hopefully in our zeal we're not chasing contributors away.

Re: Sorry!!!

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I think I've got a good version now. I'm not pleased with the opening paragraph so if you have any ideas, the page is all ears.

Re: Sorry!!!

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

I appreciate all the work you did! I mean, I think its awesome and yes, yes, people should add, we should all add, but the reason I thought of you is--you think analytically, in categories, which is awesome.

Re: Sorry!!!

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

PS--and yes, I'll go over and help!

[anatsuno.livejournal.com]

hopefully in our zeal we're not chasing contributors away.

Yes, I do hope so too - and I have apologized over there for upsetting you. The thing is, though, it is becoming increasingly clear that we have as Fanlore mods an uphill struggle coming to us, as we realize that we haven't anywhere near explained and showed enough what and how Fanlore aims to operate. As a result, sometimes the zeal is there because we are eager to avoid letting things stand that will cascade into multiple repeats of the same mistake across contributors.

Again, I'm sorry that you got burned a little much on this, but as we assume good faith from contributors - and we really do (at no point did anyone think you were trying to, I dunno, increase your own standing or position or post this to flatter yourself, that was NOT the point of the rebuttals - those were in turn made in good faith also) - contributors must also assume that people will be discussing everything about the pages: content, structure, relevance, the way it fits or doesn't into the structure or the goals of the wiki, etc.

Any page appearing that immediately pings as many "does not fit" checkboxes as yours did at first will probably always create immediate controversy from the people who are busy like bees and refreshing Recent Changes like junkies. The controversy itself should be assumed to be good-natured and not personal, is what I mean.

Hopefully Fanlore will grow not only into a great repository of knowledge and memory but also into a great place to have the controversies in the first place - a good place to hash things out.

As for people who have, like you, the good will to lend/give out their material for remixing into Fanlore, but are unwilling / unable to spend the necessary editing time on it right now, I suggest that they use the WIP notice ({{WIP}}) to make it clear to all and sundry that whatever seems "unfit" for the wiki at the moment is destined to be reworked, and there's no need to get into a froth about it - but rather, one should, if willing, dive in to edit it up to snuff!

This is a great leaning experience though. It'll help us shape Help and guidelines and everything. Thank you for playing the unwilling role of guinea pig!

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Do guinea pigs oink or squeak, I can't remember. Whichever it is -- *squeak/oink* ;)

The {{WIP}} definitely is a useful tag.

I've spent about a year on Wikipedia editing many of the Tibet and Buddhism articles. I wouldn't toss out what they've learned the hard way.

The overall issue facing Fanlore I think is how to avoid the trap Fanhistory fell into, of documenting wanks and not literature, art, etc. Documenting wanks is easy. It's journalism. Documenting literature and art, etc., well, that's more subjective and difficult.

But it is I think what we've set out to do. How can we document fandom without documenting the bulk of what fandom does? As Seperis just said: let's create the standards.