Erik Moeller wrote:

Well, I was referring to articles about fiction, not articles that *are* fiction. The latter are generally not tolerated on Wikipedia. A separate fiction-pedia (storypedia?) might indeed make sense, but be careful not to try too many projects at the same time. It's not like there's any shortage of fiction on the net ...

Point taken. I guess I misunderstood. I read your posting from a week or two ago about "micronation fantasies" and got the impression that people were starting to use Wikipedia as an outlet for their creative and humorous impulses.

It's true there's no shortage of fiction on the net, but finding *quality* fiction is comparable to finding quality encyclopedia-like information.

The impressive thing about Wikipedia, from my point of view, isn't that it makes it possible to *post* articles. (Millions of web sites do that.) The impressive thing is that it makes it possible to collaborative *edit* and *improve* articles. It seems that this model ought to be applicable to any number of non-encyclopedia applications.