Talk:Shipping discourse/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 04:29, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Vortex3427 (talk · contribs) 11:58, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vortex3427: Pinging to check in! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 03:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got here from WP:DISCORD. @Generalissima:

Background
The term shipping [...] emerged [...] to refer to fans That's "shippers". Needs to be rephrased "to refer to the fan practice" etc.
- Ah yeah, good point. - G
Link fandom.
- Done. -G
For someone who's never heard of shipping before, it'd be good to specify that after the X-Files fandom it was used in a more general sense because the text doesn't point out the leap yet.
- Done. -G
period fanfiction websites alternatively alligned with either What does period mean? Contemporary? Does alternatively need to be there, and maybe "aligned with both" instead.
- Contemporary, but that's better here. And tweaked phrasing. -G
Many ~~fans of particular pieces of media~~ Shippers.
- Fair enough. - G
Link canon to Canon (fiction).
- Oh, didn't realize that existed. -G
Due to the intensity of emotional attachment to these pairings, Because of this,
- Oh yeah, I kinda already say that in the previous sentence. Ty. -G
Can you elaborate on what fandom spaces means, exactly? I know the source doesn't really say, but it does describe Tumblr as an important fandom space
- I feel like that doesn't need extra context to be understood to someone without context: I mention both fansites and large scale social media networks used by fans. Nevertheless, I tweaked the phrasing a little bit to make this more clear. - G
The source doesn't say The "destruction of LiveJournal" but The destruction of LiveJournal communities, so it changes the meaning a little bit. Maybe just go with "This led to"?
- Changed to quote it more directly. - G

Sorry to butt in, but there is a {{citation needed}} and {{how}} tag on the page. These should be fixed before any possible GA promotion. In addition, the text was changed significantly (by another user) since the review started, so this may have to be taken into account too. Epicgenius (talk) 14:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: @Vortex3427: I resolved both of these tags; the changes to the article are prose fixes though, so yeah we'll have to go back through that. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 15:17, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vortex3427: Just checking in. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 23:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]