Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
I glanced yesterday at a recent dictionary 'of phrase and fable', which had a Pokemon article.
Here's a thought, addressed to one part of 'what do we do about popular culture articles?' A new wiki, Wikifable, could be a place to transwiki material which was basically narrative treatment of myths (Norse, manga, soap operas ...). WP itself should be left with analytical and scholarly treatment of myths. Wikifable would have to work out its own protocols (canon, fourth wall, sources ...) but they could be independent of WP's.
Ah good, I can go braindump my speculations on The Ring Cycle... you do realise that this would be perfect for Wikia, right? And that we should be a little more liberal in our attitude to external links? You can almost guarantee that an external link will survive if it's to "{{PAGENAME}} Wiki"...
It's amazing how pop culture articles make people squirm so much. I don't really do anything with them, but they have never bothered me. Pop culture is as important a part of culture as history or science. Naturally, we want to make sure that fictional characters aren't put forth as something more real than they are, If we confine ourselves to "scholarly treatment" it strikes me as though we would be putting on the same pompous airs of superiority that are often attrivbuted to ivory towers.
Ec