10,594
edits
Bharatpedia:Fancruft: Difference between revisions
→Approach
(Created page with "{{Redirect|BP:FAN|featured article nominations|BP:FAC}} {{Redirect|BP:CRUFT|other types of cruft on Bharatpedia|BP:Listcruft|and|BP:Example cruft}} {{essay|interprets=the neutral point of view policy|BP:FAN|BP:CRUFT|BP:FANCRUFT}} {{nutshell|Avoid including information that is trivial and of importance only to a small population of fans. In-universe topics must demonstrate out-of-universe notability.}} '''Fancruft''' is a term sometimes used on Bharatpedia to...") Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
==Approach== | ==Approach== | ||
If the user comes across fancruft, an approach is to [[BP:AGF|assume]] that the article or topic can be improved. If there is an insufficient amount of reliable source coverage on the topic, the focus of the discussion should be [[BP:Notability]]. More likely, the article will lack a hook—one or more interesting facts to attract or pique the interest of readers outside of the small population of enthusiastic fans of the topic. Here, the general focus of the discussion should be [[BP:NOT|What | If the user comes across fancruft, an approach is to [[BP:AGF|assume]] that the article or topic can be improved. If there is an insufficient amount of reliable source coverage on the topic, the focus of the discussion should be [[BP:Notability]]. More likely, the article will lack a hook—one or more interesting facts to attract or pique the interest of readers outside of the small population of enthusiastic fans of the topic. Here, the general focus of the discussion should be [[BP:NOT|What Bharatpedia is not]] (importance conveyed by sources) rather than [[BP:Notability]] (coverage by sources). | ||
In the context of [[BP:NOT]], the specific focus of the discussion may be that the article is a compilation of facts that reliable sources outside of fan-based reliable sources have not found interesting enough to publish. The [[BP:NOT]] question then may be whether the problem is merely a failure to include available, interesting facts (e.g., style of writing) or whether the article should be deleted under [[BP:NOT|What Bharatpedia is not]]. | In the context of [[BP:NOT]], the specific focus of the discussion may be that the article is a compilation of facts that reliable sources outside of fan-based reliable sources have not found interesting enough to publish. The [[BP:NOT]] question then may be whether the problem is merely a failure to include available, interesting facts (e.g., style of writing) or whether the article should be deleted under [[BP:NOT|What Bharatpedia is not]]. | ||