Nitpicking
When I was looking for a wiki article to use for this class I ended up on a page for the same Star Trek episode I discussed in my last post (The City on the Edge of Forever) and as I went through the talk section I found a discussion that I felt hit on a lot of points about fan communities we’ve discussed recently and was almost bizarrely funny to me. It involves one man with strong opinions about Nazi military history.
Since that’s a lot of text, a brief summary: Bruce argues that the entire central conflict of the episode is inaccurate because even if the US had entered WWII later than it did, the Germans wouldn’t have been able to develop effective nuclear weapons before the end of the war. 31dot points out that none of this matters in context of the episode and in response Bruce presents his sources. 31dot and Alan again tell Bruce that actual history doesn’t matter here, what matters is what the show says happened in history. Bruce sticks to his guns but is again shut down by Alan and Capricorn, who remind him that the Star Trek wiki is not the same thing as Wikipedia.
In a roundabout away, Capricorn pointed out the way wikis level the playing field when they pointed out that the analysis here all holds the same merit ‘no matter if it’s the thoughts of some random editor or a published scholar.’ Even if it’s used dismissively it shows the ways in which collaborative fan communities have complicated the idea of authority. Hidden behind a screen and a username, someone could be a scholar or just a dude with a lot of free time and some really strong opinions. As Mittel says “there is no inherent reason why wikis should be suited more for recording than for editorializing, and many wikis have been used as sites of collaborative creativity, collective brainstorming, and other activities that go beyond gathering and organizing facts (Dena, Douglass, and Marino 2005; Mason and Thomas 2008). But for most people, the word wiki evokes Wikipedia and its assumed objective model of writing.” I found this example interesting because while Bruce might be technically correct in the history of our world his theory is at odds with the historical fact of the Star Trek world so in the eyes of the rest of the fans, he’s just wrong.
And the ways in which Alan and 31dot point out Bruce’s failure to follow proper post format highlights how fan communities build their own rules and structures for acceptable discourse. It’s not just that he’s posting irrelevant information, he isn’t posting it right. For all the talk about freedom and new avenues of discussion most fan communities still have rigid guidelines on what is and isn’t okay within those communities. A lot of this discussion has centered around things like fanfiction and slash, which are often looked down upon as lesser forms of fan creativity because they tend to deviate more from accepted canon.
BruceGrubb, et al. “Talk: City on the Edge of Forever; Dated Premise.” Memory Alpha, Aug. 2017, memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:The_City_on_the_Edge_of_Forever_(episode).
Mittell, J. “Sites of Participation: Wiki Fandom and the Case of Lostpedia”. Transformative Works and Cultures, Vol. 3, July 2009, doi:https://doi.org/10.3983/twc.2009.0118.







