Posts Tagged ‘doctor who’

More about Fan History’s fanzine section

June 22nd, 2009

This was an e-mail I sent elsewhere.  I’ve reposted it minus the introduction and the quoted text.


Recently, Fan History received a couple of fanzine cover deletion
requests. We had a policy on the wiki which for fan art was e-mail us
and prove that you’re the artist and we’ll delete the fan art. It was
not very detailed. We’d never really had an issue with this material
where we felt we needed to clarify our policy regarding that. The
deletion requests gave us reason to clarify both our policy in regards
to fanzine related articles and fanart. 1.6.1 Fan art and fanzine covers
<http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Help:Article_deletion#Fan_art_and_fanzin\
e_covers
> is our fanart and fanzine cover policy. 1.7 Fanzine article
deletion request
<http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Help:Article_deletion#Fanzine_article_de\
letion_request
> is our fanzine article deletion policy. Summarizing
them: If you are a fanzine publisher or fanartist, drop us an e-mail and
we’ll delete the cover. In regards to fanzines, if the fanzine is
non-notable, we’ll probably delete it if you can give us a good reason.
We know that many people published them in pre-Internet days before real
name issues were as problematic as they can be now. We’ll try to be as
accomodating as possible.

Fan History has a fair amount of information about fanzines already.
That can be found at http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Category:Fanzines
<http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Category:Fanzines> . There is
probably information about 2,000 fanzines on Fan History. We’re really
proud of our Star Wars
<http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Category:Star_Wars_fanzines> , Star
Trek <http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Category:Star_Trek_fanzines> ,
Forever Knight
<http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Category:Forever_Knight_fanzines> ,
Doctor Who <http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Category:Doctor_Who_fanzines>
, Rat Patrol
<http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Category:Rat_Patrol_fanzines>
sections. Many articles have cover art, publishing histories, summaries
of fan responses to the fanzine, links for more information, etc. What
these articles don’t have and will never have is the complete fanzine in
image format unless we’re given permission to redistribute a zine in
that fashion. In one or two cases, (I’m thinking a Led Zeppelin
drawerfic type zine) we may have extracts of a few pages. We’d argue
these are fair use and if called on them, we would remove them. We’re
just not set up to be a redistributor of fanzines in image format. Our
mission isn’t to do that and we don’t have any intention of doing that.
(And most especially not charging people to make copies. I’ve seen
enough of the discussion on mailing lists regarding the reprinting of
fanzines with out permission to know some people find it repulsive and I
don’t want Fan History associated with that.) Our mission is to
document that these fanzines existed, this is what the cover looked
like, these fandoms were involved with the zine, these people were
involved in the production of this material.

We’d also like to think that for fanzine publishers and authors with
material in fanzines that we’d be useful to you as another place where
you can promote your fanzines. We don’t have a problem with a fanzine
publisher coming in and including links to where you can buy the fanzine
online, what convention the publisher will be at and selling the
fanzine, etc. Commercial links like that, as long as they fit in to the
article and follow our rules <http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Help:Rules>
are more than welcome.

If you have any questions about our deletion policy, our fanzine section
or anything else regarding Fan History, please feel free to e-mail me at
laura@… or one of our admins at support@….
You can also reach us by commenting on the talk page for articles or
categories you have questions for. In fact, we’d almost prefer the
second because if you have questions, some one else might have the same
one and clarifying our policies through the use of talk pages helps out
everyone in fandom. (And it holds us more accountable because our
actions are then part of the public record.)

Thanks for reading.

Sincerely,
Laura

The problems of writing personal histories in a wiki…

April 21st, 2009

On Thursday morning, a friend of Fan History’s and one of our admins pointed me at another post about the issues with FanLore.  We were really interested in this post because it dealt with similar yet different issues than the ones brought up by nextian.  Like that post, we’ve gone through and commented in terms of how we’ve handled similar criticism, how we handle situations like the one mentioned in terms of FanLore, what advice we have, etc.  We haven’t addressed the whole post and the comments because of length.  (And because we got a bit distracted by other things going on.)  We hope to get back to it.

A lot of non-fic fandom is languishing at Fanlore. Gamer fandom, in particular, I notice, ‘cos I’ve been part of that for (eeep!) more than thirty years.

This is a similar problem that Fan History has faced.  And it isn’t just non-fic fandoms.  It is fandoms where there is a community outside of and removed from the fan fiction community.  This was an area we were criticized for about two years.  We were too fan fiction-centric.  We weren’t multifannish enough.  We didn’t encourage the telling of fandom history outside of the fan fiction community.  And those criticisms were entirely valid back then. But now?  We’ve got a whole lot of fan fiction content but we’re a lot less fan fiction-centric in terms of our article scope.  Removing that has been a goal of ours and on our to-do list for a long time. It’s there as a reminder that when we see a timeline for a fandom that says “this fan fiction community,” we change it to “this fan community” or “this fandom.”  We’ve made this a priority.

That doesn’t even begin to get into the issue of media fandom vs. anime and manga fandom vs. actor fandom vs. music fandoms vs. video game fandoms.  In this respect, I think Fan History was fortunate because we had anime and video game fandoms represented early thanks to Jae, one of our earliest contributors.  She had a lot of experience in the Digimon and Final Fantasy communities, and created a number of articles about them.  We are also fortunate to a degree as my own interests were pretty pan-fannish.  I had connections to the anime and  music fandoms because of my relationships with the folks at RockFic, the guy who runs FanWorks.Org, and the people who run MediaMiner.Org.

FanLore isn’t as fortunate in that regards.  Their traditions, their interests have always been focused on media fandom and science fiction.  They don’t really have one or two core people who come from fannish experiences outside their own who, organizationally, are equal to other members of that community.  It is easy to have that problem because you tend to go with what you know, hang out with like-minded people, and stay in your comfort zone.

If you want those other fan communities represented, you have give those fans an investment in it.  You bypass the traditional rules.  You find a BNF in one of those fandoms, offer them admin status, and encourage them to promote the project in their own community.  We did this with the Kim Possible fandom.  We made one their own a fandom administrator, talked to the guy on a regular basis and encouraged him to reach out to his community.  And, to a certain degree, it worked.  If we hadn’t done that outeach, we would not have seen the edits to the Kim Possible section that we have had.  None of our core contributors have ever really been in the Harry Potter or Rescue Rangers fandoms to any large degree.  We reached out on mailing lists, LiveJournal groups, fansites, and fan fiction archives.  We asked for their help.  These folks responded.  Why?  We built a framework which made it easy to contribute.  In most cases, we left them alone to make edits as they needed to so long as they didn’t violate the rules.  They responded more when those articles became useful for them in terms of regularly visiting and linking because people couldn’t get that content elsewhere.

But I’m not sure what to do with the wiki. It’s… big. And mostly empty, in the areas of fandom that are most dear to me. And I’m not a historian; I don’t remember the details, the names & dates, of the fannish events & memes that I grew to love; I remember vague overview of concepts, and a few bright points of detail, which make for lousy wiki entries. I would like to start entries and allow others to fix them, but the few I tried that with, haven’t worked. I don’t think there’s anyone active at Fanlore who comes from “my branch(es)” of fandom.

The thing is, you don’t NEED to be a historian to be able to write the history of a fan community.  You don’t need all the dates.   You can write a good history based on general feel.  People can come in later and improve it with citations.  Just describe what you see going on with your gut feeling and explain that as well as you can.  Describe the community and how it operates.  Heck, a lot of this is not citable; how can you cite things like trends in, say, the LiveJournal community?  There is no way to cite, without doing a lot of research and without having access to primary source documents.

What we hope will happen is that by someone putting what they feel in there, what they intrinsically understand as a community history or how the community functions, someone else will be inspired by seeing that to do the additional research.  Or that someone else will disagree with that and edit it to include their own perspective, and the two different perspectives that can’t really be sourced can be merged.  Or that someone will know some good citations to support what is written.

The models for doing this have to be different because you aren’t writing a traditional history.  This is not the same as writing a history of the US Civil War.  Much of this involves writing ethnographic-style history.  The methodologies are different than other forms of documenting history.  The practices are different.  Both types of history are different from writing meta.

This all has an impact on how people contribute.  Administrators need to keep that in mind. The admin team needs to understand the fundamental methodologies involved in writing history.  At Fan History, our admins have spent a lot of time getting a crash course on exactly this.   There have been discussions on our mailing list about the methodologies of writing women’s histories, and how historians use oral histories in their research.  We’ve talked about multiple perspectives and issues of bias in the telling of fandom history.  We’ve discussed research done in fandom by academics like Henry Jenkins and Camille Bacon-Smith, identified areas of bias and how we can learn from that.  We’ve discussed primary sources, secondary sources, historian bias, reporter bias, the role of collaboration in history writing, quantitative versus qualitative approaches and merging the two approaches to get a cohesive history.  The more familiar the admin staff is with these issues, the better they are at analyzing, guiding and teaching others in terms of writing those histories in fandoms where those admins are not involved.

Knowing all this methodology also helps admins because they can learn when to leave alone historical information where someone doesn’t know the exact dates and might be a little off but are well-intentioned, and when they should step in to correct things that are obviously wrong or intentionally inflammatory.  For example, they can learn to correct when some one thinks they recall something about LiveJournal before LiveJournal actually existed or says something like: “There was never a good mpreg story published in the CSI fandom”.  The grounding in methodology helps to identify when you don’t need sources and when you do.

We’ve done an excellent job in  a few sections without many sources.  http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/CSI does that; no citations but tells history with charity work, with fan fiction archives like FanLib, and with how the LiveJournal community works.  We’ve also done a fairly good job with that on the mpreg article.  http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Mpreg talks about how mpreg is received in particular fan communities.  No citations.  Are we going to remove them?  No.  If there are issues, we can use the talk page to discuss that.  If people have problems with that, they can toss in {{fact}} or {{POV}}.

And if you still have issues where you can’t integrate that information, you do outreach.

I’m a sci-fi fan; I love reading, not watching, my sci-fi input. I love conventions, even though I’ve gone to very very few in the last decade. (So all of my con-based fanlore is decades old. Sigh.) And I want to fill in the blanks for the fandoms I love, but I can’t even get a grip on where and how to start.

I can totally understand that.   When I started writing the history of fandom, I had similar problems…  though more so the case of I had a lot of historical information that I could cite but all that information was really absent context. I didn’t know how to integrate it in to a historical context where these bits and pieces made sense.  I had lists of Doctor Who, Blake’s 7, Star Trek, and Starsky and Hutch fanzines from the 1980s, but no information about how of those zines were received by the readers, what were common tropes, who was writing them, or who the audience was.  How the heck do you put that information into an article about the fandom those zines come from and have it fit in any sort of meaningful way?  A lot of the culture probably changed when things went online.  There might not have been a continuity in that culture when it went online, so totally different cultural practices were created.   And sometimes, you really are left wondering who will care about that Blake’s 7 femslash zine that was written in 1992 other than someone into trivia.  Also, a lot of this might be duplicate historical research that someone already put out in a fanzine list done in 1995 and if only you had access… It is just a mess.

But at least that information is easy to cite or know.  It might be hard to get a grip on when you’re trying to put it into a big picture and you don’t have a starting place.  The personal, well, I can totally understand that in a different context.   I don’t know when some things happened.  I know I was on staff at FanFiction.Net.  I know I wrote the site’s first Terms of Service.  I know I got into a big fight with Steven Savage over policies.  I don’t know the exact dates.  I don’t have copies of the original text.  I know I founded the b5teens.  I know I got into a giant kerfluffle with some people on another mailing list when I was 16.  Many of the others involved in the group with me back then have left fandom.  I don’t know the dates. I don’t have the texts.  I’m sure as heck hoping that the fan fiction I wrote has disappeared.  Even assuming I knew some of that information, it was still weird to find a starting point.  What seems really big and important to you when you’re in the thick of it is difficult to put into any sort of proper historical context.

How can you make your own history as unbiased as possible?  People do a lot of stupid things -myself included - and really, who wants to deliberately make themselves look bad?   After dealing with that, how do you cite information when the source is yourself?  Or when you’re documenting history that includes your own involvement?  What event do you start with?  Do you start on the stuff you’re most passionate about, or the place where you can most easily slot your history in? Do you write the history where you can most easily put information into context, or the history where you can best cite your sources?

And you know, there are no easy answers to where to start when you’re talking about random bits of fandom historical knowledge or your own history. The best suggestion, in personal terms, is to think of your own goals for involvement for writing a history.  Is there a particular fandom where you have a lot of experience and knowledge but no one has really written up a history yet?  Is there an event that you think matters where you feel like you have a unique perspective?  Has someone written information that can provide a framework for your own history?

Those might be a places to start if you’re stumped. Try to write biographies or histories of the key players that you know.  Timeline specific events in the context of the convention, mailing list, fanzine, IRC chat room, fanclub, social network or kerfluffle.  Create an outline. This information doesn’t need to be ready for “prime time.”  You’re not writing an academic text.  You’re providing information from within the fan community to help members of the fan community and those on the outside better understand it.  Tenure isn’t at risk.  (Though if you’re writing biased material with the intent of making yourself and your friends look better, your reputation in the fan community might be at risk.)   In the early stages, the information that you’re writing or collecting doesn’t even necessarily need to go on the main article about a fandom.  You can keep it on subpages until you understand all the moving pieces and how they fit into the larger fandom picture.  Then, later, you can integrate it into the main article or just create a “see also” in the main article.

If that doesn’t work for you, there are other places to start.  Find the talk page for an article relevant to the history you want to tell.  Introduce yourself on the talk page, talk about your experiences, cite sources where some of that information can be verified and ask the contributors to the article to integrate that information into the article.  Follow up when people ask questions or explanations.   Using talk pages this way can be helpful in terms of learning the feel of a wiki community and how people expect you to contribute.  They can also help you find someone who is more comfortable in terms of finding a starting place, who can help you focus what you want to do.  Starting on talking pages can also be similar to drafting on subpages like I mentioned above: there is less pressure because things aren’t on the main article and you don’t need to make a judgement call on the merits of what you’re contributing.  Others can do that by chosing to integrate your knowledge and experience into the article.

Follow up: Most human revised articles on Fan History

April 9th, 2009

The last post was heavy in terms of bot revised edits on Fan History. It is that way because our data collection bots update every day and some have been active since September 2008. This is the last of non-bot, human edited entries on Fan History.

The following data is cached, and was last updated 18:45, 9 April 2009.

Showing below up to 500 results starting with #1.

View (previous 500) (next 500) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

  1. Harry Potter ?(291 revisions)
  2. Draco/Hermione ?(242 revisions)
  3. Bandfic ?(228 revisions)
  4. Beauty and the Beast ?(221 revisions)
  5. Digimon ?(219 revisions)
  6. Supernatural ?(219 revisions)
  7. CSI ?(214 revisions)
  8. Rescue Rangers ?(209 revisions)
  9. Doctor Who ?(200 revisions)
  10. X-Files ?(195 revisions)
  11. Main Page ?(190 revisions)
  12. Cassandra Claire ?(186 revisions)
  13. Organization for Transformative Works ?(184 revisions)
  14. Slash ?(157 revisions)
  15. Doctor Who fanzines ?(138 revisions)
  16. Star Trek ?(135 revisions)
  17. Bleach ?(132 revisions)
  18. Russell Crowe ?(122 revisions)
  19. Star Trek fanzines ?(121 revisions)
  20. AdultFanFiction.Net ?(119 revisions)
  21. Star Wars ?(118 revisions)
  22. Sailor Moon ?(118 revisions)
  23. The Police ?(115 revisions)
  24. Susan M. Garrett ?(114 revisions)
  25. Daiken ?(114 revisions)
  26. Lord of the Rings ?(113 revisions)
  27. LiveJournal ?(112 revisions)
  28. Mortal Instruments ?(107 revisions)
  29. Roswell ?(106 revisions)
  30. FanFiction.Net ?(106 revisions)
  31. Zelda ?(105 revisions)
  32. Duran Duran ?(103 revisions)
  33. The Forever Knight Fan Fiction Awards ?(101 revisions)
  34. Naruto ?(100 revisions)
  35. Msscribe ?(99 revisions)
  36. Avatar: The Last Airbender ?(97 revisions)
  37. Mlina ?(95 revisions)
  38. Lucia de’Medici ?(95 revisions)
  39. Warcraft ?(95 revisions)
  40. Draco/Ginny ?(95 revisions)
  41. Final Fantasy VII ?(94 revisions)
  42. Current events ?(91 revisions)
  43. Grissom/Sara ?(89 revisions)
  44. Canadian Idol ?(89 revisions)
  45. Fan fiction archives ?(89 revisions)
  46. Gundam Wing ?(87 revisions)
  47. Plagiarism ?(86 revisions)
  48. Race Fail 2009 ?(86 revisions)
  49. Buffy: The Vampire Slayer ?(86 revisions)
  50. Xena: Warrior Princess ?(85 revisions)
  51. Twilight ?(85 revisions)
  52. My Chemical Romance ?(83 revisions)
  53. X-men ?(82 revisions)
  54. Thunderbirds ?(79 revisions)
  55. Hey Arnold! ?(78 revisions)
  56. Tikatu ?(78 revisions)

Most revised articles on Fan History

April 9th, 2009

We discovered today that Special:MostRevisions won’t load 95% of the time because it just takes too long to load. That’s what happens with over a million and a half edits. Before we cache it and it no longer updates, I thought I would present to you that list of the top 50 most edited articles. A lot of these are bot updated daily so counting them seems a bit iffy… but that’s neither here nor there. now for the list:

Pages with the most revisions

From Fan History Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Showing below up to 50 results starting with #1.

  1. Harry Potter ?(291 revisions)
  2. Draco/Hermione ?(242 revisions)
  3. Zoey101 (LiveJournal) size/table ?(229 revisions)
  4. Bandfic ?(228 revisions)
  5. Beauty and the Beast ?(221 revisions)
  6. Supernatural ?(219 revisions)
  7. Digimon ?(219 revisions)
  8. CSI ?(214 revisions)
  9. Rescue Rangers ?(209 revisions)
  10. Harry Potter fan fiction community size/table ?(205 revisions)
  11. NCIS fan fiction community size/table ?(204 revisions)
  12. Naruto fan fiction community size/table ?(204 revisions)
  13. Avatar: Last Airbender fan fiction community size/table ?(204 revisions)
  14. Bleach fan fiction community size/table ?(204 revisions)
  15. Twilight fan fiction community size/table ?(204 revisions)
  16. Death Note fan fiction community size/table ?(204 revisions)
  17. House MD fan fiction community size/table ?(203 revisions)
  18. Inuyasha fan fiction community size/table ?(203 revisions)
  19. Supernatural fan fiction community size/table ?(203 revisions)
  20. Fandom tracking/table ?(202 revisions)
  21. Bones fan fiction community size/table ?(202 revisions)
  22. CSI fan fiction community size/table ?(202 revisions)
  23. Doctor Who fan fiction community size/table ?(201 revisions)
  24. D.Gray-Man fan fiction community size/table ?(201 revisions)
  25. Wrestling fan fiction community size/table ?(201 revisions)
  26. Pokemon fan fiction community size/table ?(201 revisions)
  27. Heroes fan fiction community size/table ?(201 revisions)
  28. Maximum Ride fan fiction community size/table ?(201 revisions)
  29. CSI: New York fan fiction community size/table ?(200 revisions)
  30. Prince of Tennis fan fiction community size/table ?(200 revisions)
  31. Shugo Chara! fan fiction community size/table ?(200 revisions)
  32. Doctor Who ?(200 revisions)
  33. Stargate: SG-1 fan fiction community size/table ?(199 revisions)
  34. Total Drama Island fan fiction community size/table ?(199 revisions)
  35. Vampire Knights fan fiction community size/table ?(199 revisions)
  36. One Piece fan fiction community size/table ?(199 revisions)
  37. Chronicles of Narnia fan fiction community size/table ?(198 revisions)
  38. Bis(s) fan fiction community size/table ?(198 revisions)
  39. Hannah Montana fan fiction community size/table ?(198 revisions)
  40. Katekyo Hitman Reborn! fan fiction community size/table ?(198 revisions)
  41. South Park fan fiction community size/table ?(198 revisions)
  42. Stargate: Atlantis fan fiction community size/table ?(198 revisions)
  43. Code Geass fan fiction community size/table ?(197 revisions)
  44. Criminal Minds fan fiction community size/table ?(197 revisions)
  45. Yu-Gi-Oh fan fiction community size/table ?(197 revisions)
  46. One Tree Hill fan fiction community size/table ?(197 revisions)
  47. Ouran High School Host Club fan fiction community size/table ?(197 revisions)
  48. Sailor Moon fan fiction community size/table ?(197 revisions)
  49. Fullmetal Alchemist fan fiction community size/table ?(197 revisions)
  50. Buffy: The Vampire Slayer fan fiction community size/table ?(197 revisions)

We have LiveJournal stats! So what fandoms are hot on LJ?

January 14th, 2009

I’ll get to the title line after first explaining what we’re talking about with LiveJournal stats. If you haven’t figured it out, we love stats at Fan History. We love them a lot. Stats can back up your gut feeling about what is going on in fandom. We’ve been tracking the size of fandom on FanFiction.Net, FanWorks.Org, FicWad, SkyHawke, FanFikion.De and Freedom of Speech for a couple of months and we’re addicted. It showed us that Twilight fandom had a small post movie release bump but it really took about two, three weeks for the fandom to explode. (And the numbers haven’t gone down since.)

Given this love, we wanted to get more stats. And we wanted our stats to come from LiveJournal and its clones because we’ve always been told that LiveJournal is a hub of fandom activity. How busy is the fandom? How active? What fandoms are more active than others? How do we measure the level of fandom activity on LiveJournal and its clones?

The method that was chose was to manually create a list of LJ comms based on fandoms. We chose manual because interests don’t really work. You could pick up icon communities dedicated to 100 fandoms where the fandom is unlikely to be represented regularly. We then built a list which we sorted by fandom, by language and by service. Our final list for LiveJournal included 3,092 fandoms. We couldn’t really make it much bigger because we needed to be able to update all these articles in a single day AND the bot would need to access each profile once a day to get the stats we were looking for. The stats pick up total posts, total comments, total members, total watchers and that information is put onto an article about the community in question. All the communities for a fandom are then added together and put on article which measures the total activity in a fandom based on our list for that fandom. Example: Harry Potter LiveJournal community size. After that’s done, those columns are then added together based on language for the community and we get a beautiful list like this list.

What’s interesting is that Twilight is hot on LiveJournal and it clones AND hot with various fan fiction archives. Harry Potter, second on fan fiction archives, is only 18th on LiveJournal. (This could be because our LiveJournal sample is missing the more active HP communities but I some how doubt it.) Naruto is third with fan fiction archives but 15th on LiveJournal. This could be because anime communities are much better represented elsewhere on sites like CrunchyRoll, AnimeNewsNetwork, anime specific blogging sites, etc.

When you get out of English, Twilight fandom is well, active but not always active. It was tops on our Finnish sample. It was 8th in our French sample. It was 7th in our Italian sample. It was tops in Spanish. For the other languages, we couldn’t find communities for Twilight to even be included. That’s the case for most fandoms: Non-English representation is tiny. The fandom language communities just aren’t there, even if the language is. (There are half a dozen Slovak communities but none are fandom specific.)

So that all out of the way, below are the top 100 fandoms on LiveJournal, based on our sample, for yesterday:

Fandom movers and shakers for LiveJournal on January 14, 2009
Rank   ? Fandom   ? Total Activity   ? Previous rank   ?
1 Twilight 6665 1
2 Meta 1232 2
3 WWE 1077 25
4 House M.D. 951 3
5 Katekyo Hitman Reborn! 833 7
6 Gossip Girls 735 9
7 Doctor Who 727 4
8 How I Met Your Mother 473 6
9 Merlin 381 5
10 Jonas Brothers 322 13
11 Bones 300 48
12 Top Gear 278 45
13 Darker than Black 221 31
14 As the World Turns 219 18
15 Naruto 184 16
16 30 Seconds to Mars 180 44
17 30 Rock 168 14
18 Harry Potter 167 10
19 Hanson 165 84
20 One Tree Hill 162 124
21 Slayers 150 47
22 My Chemical Romance 134 75
23 New Kids on the Block 130 156
24 David Tennant 130 19
25 NCIS 129 24
26 Laurell K. Hamilton 125 37
27 Britney Spears 124 34
28 Anita Blake 123 36
29 Life on Mars 118 26
30 High School Musical 118 12
31 Ugly Betty 115 33
32 Avatar: The Last Airbender 115 79
33 Neil Patrick Harris 113 8
34 Mystery Science Theater 3000 113 54
35 Bleach 112 15
36 Manchester United 111 11
37 Sports fan fiction 107 42
38 Soccer fan fiction 107 43
39 Sailor Moon 98 28
40 Transformers 94 40
41 The Office (US) 93 23
42 Grey’s Anatomy 87 50
43 Star Trek 83 21
44 Prince of Tennis 81 109
45 Torchwood 76 17
46 Stargate SG-1 76 29
47 An Cafe 76 20
48 Ben 10 74 108
49 Gackt 73 72
50 Pokemon 71 74
51 Alice Nine 67 128
52 Law and Order: SVU 65 71
53 America’s Next Top Model 62 22
54 Lost 57 68
55 24 56 112
56 West Wing 55 80
57 The Sentinel 52 46
58 Vancouver Islanders 51 52
59 The Big Bang Theory 51 117
60 The Mentalist 48 73
61 Saiyuki 48 39
62 Bob Dylan 48 253
63 Fullmetal Alchemist 47 69
64 Ewan McGregor 46 51
65 Ace Attorney 45 119
66 the GazettE 44 56
67 Veronica Mars 44 91
68 U2 44 162
69 The Young and the Restless 44 306
70 CSI: Miami 44 111
71 Atlanta Braves 44 228
72 One Piece 43 38
73 L Word 43 67
74 Dir en grey 43 30
75 Futurama 42 703
76 CSI 42 64
77 iCarly 40 27
78 Kingdom Hearts 40 107
79 Batman 40 78
80 Speed Racer 39 92
81 Beverly Hills 90210 39 127
82 X-Files 37 85
83 Drake & Josh 37 58
84 Phantom of the Opera 36 209
85 Mad Men 36 59
86 Lord of the Rings 36 101
87 Hellsing 34 187
88 Dancing with the Stars 34 131
89 Backstreet Boys 34 183
90 The Late Late Show 33 96
91 Craig Ferguson 33 99
92 Inuyasha 32 141
93 Boston Red Sox 29 104
94 Princess Tutu 27 65
95 David Bowie 27 110
96 Bandom 27 88
97 Sonic: The Hedgehog 25 208
98 Whose Line is it Anyway 24 95
99 Supernatural 24 60
100 Pushing Daises 24 32

Keyword peaks for fandoms and fansites on Fan History in 2008

December 31st, 2008

The following are when interest, based on keyword (not keyphrase), spiked in 2008 on Fan History according to Google Analytics…

January 5

January 11

January 13

January 14

January 27

February 22

February 27

March 2

March 8

March 13

March 18

April 17

April 29

May 22

May 27

June 10

June 13

July 6

July 20

July 24

July 29

August 3

August 11

August 12

August 13

August 21

August 22

August 23

September 12

September 27

September 29

October 6

October 15

October 16

October 17

October 20

October 21

October 31

November 6

November 9

November 9

November 11

November 22

November 23

November 28

December 1

December 6

December 9

December 11

December 28

December 29

FanFiction.Net vs. LiveJournal community size

December 6th, 2008

The bot isn’t finished running yet… but while still compiling, I thought it was worth looking at some of these fandoms and how the size of LJ fandom is beginning to look, how big fandoms look versus eachother and versus FanFiction.Net community size…

This isn’t yet complete as the bot continues to run. Some fandoms may not have had their communities looked at because they didn’t cross over much with communities the bot has already looked at. There might be some naming issues which still need to be resolved. (Which were corrected when I spotted a few of them.) Some fandoms just didn’t have communities about them in the sample community list. Some categories actually contracted as we did admin work such as deleting duplicate articles and handled Article Deletion Requests… so any fandom which didn’t have over 50 new articles for categories with over 650 articles in them were excluded.

But overall, this table begins to paint an interesting picture as to the biggest fandoms on LiveJournal. FanFiction.Net column is total articles from FanFiction.Net. LiveJournal column is FanFiction.Net + LiveJournal articles (or new total of articles in the category). Difference column equals total number of members from LiveJournal.

Canonical URL by SEO No Duplicate WordPress Plugin