Forum:Review of Fan Art Policy

Forums: Helping Hand > Review of Fan Art Policy

---

Use the following template for a nicely presented post:

{{Forum post|Write your message here!|~~~~}}

---

The Fan Art policy has been in place for several years now, and since then more images have been uploaded and displayed under it. However, it remains controversial among editors and some stances have since changed.

With the recent upload of File:Martisha Vinetalker Fan art.jpg, there's been renewed discussion both on my Talk page at User_talk:BadCatMan#Fan_art and behind the scenes, so it might be time to reconsider the policy. Please share your views below.

For reference, the earlier discussion that led to the existing policy is at Forgotten_Realms_Wiki_talk:Fan_Art.

BadCatMan (talk) 13:07, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

My opinion is that some professional grade fan art is ok, especially when art matches canon description... However, as a blanket rule, my vote would be against fan art altogether.

Artie (talk) 13:20, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

There's some pretty good fan art, but my vote would be largely against fan art, with what we do accept being reviewed for accuracy.

SilverTiger12 (talk) 13:26, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm relatively new here but my opinion is that fan art should be allowed as long as it was made specifically for the Forgotten Realms setting, it is true to the official description, it is clearly marked as fan art and the author gives permission. I feel like some fan art is of the same quality as official art, sometimes even of higher quality. And some official content just doesn't have artwork at all. In my opinion, fan art can be beneficial to some articles in these cases. For example, Storm Lord's Wrath is an adventure with very little artwork. I found Jacob Johnston's blog with fan art of basically every NPC from the adventure, among other things, that he made publicly available. As far as I can tell, his artwork stays true to the official descriptions in the adventures. The artwork of Martisha Vinetalker that I uploaded is probably not the best example (as she looks relatively generic) but his artwork of more recognizable NPCs like the half-orc cook Cooragh Struckt or the Tabaxi captain Stands in Tar as well as of monsters like the Star spawn mangler or the Skull flier are really good in my opinion and official artwork for them just doesn't exist (at least as far as I know).

Malte Martin (talk) 14:24, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

The problem with this is art is subjective. One person might think a piece is gorgeous, while another might hate it and think it to be the worst. Removing fan art is simply to avoid conflicts and to adhere with canon policy already in place.

Artie (talk) 14:29, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

How about relegating all fan art to a sub-page called /Fan art gallery and put a link to it in the Gallery section of the appendix? Only official art would be used on the page itself. This keeps our pages as canon as possible while still acknowledging the talent, time, and effort that some folks have put into creating beautiful maps or portraits.

—Moviesign (talk) 14:44, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

No. As with risque canon art, if we keep fan art, I'd rather treat it relatively normally rather than specifically drawing attention to it in such a manner. That said, two things: first, we should differentiate between fan-made maps and fan art, and second, we could establish some review process to go over fan art before using it (I take inspiration from WP:PALEOARTREVIEW)

SilverTiger12 (talk) 15:11, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

To begin with, let me state that I am of the opinion that fan art should be included in the infobox or bodies of articles. I do believe it should reviewed, voted upon, or otherwise approved by mods/admins of the wiki. I actually rather like the idea of a fan art section for approved upon depictions, for all the reasons Moviesign listed.

Ruf (talk) 16:25, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

As much as I adore art, fan art should be banned from this particular wiki. This is a canon wiki that uses official and officially licensed sources and so should only have canon content that is from official and officially licensed sources. Many of these comments have already been addressed via my proposal in the talk thread linked above. Please read the full thread, as it already addresses what is spoken of here. I list below the outline of a policy that defines what is fan art and what is not:

---

Definition of fan art / unofficial art:

Any image that is made from scratch, or an official image that has had its content modified (i.e., warped).

Content modification: unallowed:

Content modification applies to the descriptive aspect of art. Descriptive art portrays the description of something to the viewer: a sketch of a character, painting of a building etc.

Example:

If one takes an official sketch of a character and modifies its description, such as changing the color of the character's hair, this is classed as unofficial art, and not allowed. Filling in old black-and-white art, such as in regards to heraldry, that completely matches the canon description would be allowed, as it doesn't actually modify (warp) the content. Content modification can also apply to maps. If one takes a map, and explicitly changes the location of the landmarks, this is also not allowed, as the content is modified (warped).

Non-content modification: allowed:

Other types of modification are allowed, as long as the content is not changed. Maps, for example, can be modified without changing the content of the original art. Annotated maps are extremely useful for showing the locations of roads, city wards, etc. Imagemaps, cropping (changing dimensions), highlighting (a region, a road, etc), coloring an image to canon specifications, etc, are allowed. Any type of labelling, adding arrows, and adding physical locations, to maps or diagrams, are also allowed. Highlighting a section of a map would be allowed, as the content is not warped.

Example:

One wishes to describe where a series of portals connect across Faerûn. One then takes a section of an existing map, and draws the connections between the portals. This does not modify the content of the existing map, it has simply been modified to illustrate the connections; its content is not altered.

An image that doesn't modify the content must also:

• be sourced: the original image needs to be sourced and the modified image must state who modified it.
• be clear and justifiably correct: a modified map showing that Auckney is close to Luskan is correct, but showing it east of Luskan is not. Use official, canon sources and text to backup your claim.
• have permission to be used: you must have the permission from those who modified the image.
• not replicate something that already exists if it doesn't add anything extra.
• be useful and relevant: a map of the Neverwinter region with an arrow pointing to Neverwinter stating "the location of the Neverwinter Nine" is not useful.
• follow all other rules that apply to official images.

---

Fan art: Against in all forms that violate the above, including the gallery.

As per Movie's external gallery idea (where it is linked on the page but the images aren't actually shown)... I'd rather fan art be off the wiki in entirety, but I would be willing to accept this as a compromise if it helps moving this policy forward.

Possessed Priest (talk) 16:41, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't see a purpose in fan art galleries. This is a wiki, not deviant art. Adding homebrew would only dilute what's canon and it would inevitably influence opinions of future authors/gamers doing research on the wiki. We already have bad 5e art that conflict canon as is, we really don't need more of that from outside sources.

Artie (talk) 14:29, 8 March 2022 (UTC)