This is a draft of a potential Signpost article, and should not be interpreted as a finished piece. Its content is subject to review by the editorial team and ultimately by JPxG, the editor in chief. Please do not link to this draft as it is unfinished and the URL will change upon publication. If you would like to contribute and are familiar with the requirements of a Signpost article, feel free to be bold in making improvements!
| |||||

Focus on a Look
The Fandoms, which for those who believe that's too vague of a description; explicitly the passionate fans of the very beloved games; Five Nights at Freddy's, if you will, has prolonged for a more flexible wikipedia. Despite being a world-renowned encyclopedia, wikipedia seems to have fallen short in the department whose enjoyers are those with high levels of influence, and even purchasing power, no doubt. The Fandoms have existed as long as wikipedia started drinking its cup of milk! As two parts of the internet, and a very expressive one at that, fandoms on wikipedia are rather thought to be not so full-fletched.
Focusing on the reason
“Wikipedia's flexibility is the problem!”
Now, why is quite complicated here, but fandoms have several ways to infest and reinforce themselves, that is, art, knowledge and interest. Now, when fandoms discuss, they use Fandom the Website, but despite the website having massive problems, a lot of fandomers in Gaming, art and media tend to not use wikipedia as a primary source of their fandom discussion, excluding the knowledge of knowing something very specific itself rather than the fandom. "But we do have fandom articles!" I hear you say, and you are absolutely right; wikipedia does have Five Nights at Freddy's, or Poppy Playtime and all that! Yet, they're very surface level and not primarily used. Now, we have concluded the main reason is flexibility of wikipedia articles, which isn't really much when its wikis, because there's so many non-niche, and very mainstream fandoms that yet to primarily use Wikipedia as form of information gatherings! Now wikipedia is probably not gonna be somewhere where you learn about a game in-depth; you'd watch a youtube video! cause it's more deep-leveled. (to be said, there are very in-depth fandom articles out here! not to undermine anyone)
Focus on Traffic: Are Fandom Wikis without competition?

Fandom-based wikis such that is were called out for being AI-slop and Advertisement filled, yet they have not seen any competition and still attract many people across the internet without one drive-through our wikipedia. Unfortunately, the Gemini AI that Google introduced slowed the usual traffic pace to Wikipedia, which is already well known. However, fandom-based wikis also took damage from it. Yet, fandoms themselves rather opened up their own independent or officially run Wikipedias instead of moving here or to fandom-based Wikipedias. For a lot of fandoms, having their own Wikipedia is a hard-notch job, so while this is not very popular yet, it may become a new traffic trend away from well-established wikis.
Wikipedians at Focus: Editors in Fandoms
You may not be so surprised to find out that a group of people who use their part-time to write on the internet are also part of large online or real-time communities with a special interest. You can even say I like FNaF.. Well, despite the high numbers of fandom involvement, the shaky yet inactive future between fandoms and wikipedia looks even shakier. Now the question is whether what those wikipedians do and think, are wikipedians even around writing for their fandoms? Really, how many wikipedians even took a great look at their favourite fandoms, interests, and even unfamiliar territory? Comes another problem; unlike fandom areas, wikipedia does not have any centralization of what fandoms are, where they are, and how to reach them. Now, thats a real milk-tough for ya!
Conventions on the Focus
Conventions of multitude media, such as PAX, Gamescom, or Comic Con, are a primary source for our eagle-eyed editors who might like to find images for the Wikimedia Commons, or press notability support for their favourite articles, that is. Especially for indie games, looking for examples. A primary example is the Undertale, particularly the article's usage of events and cosplays, and fandoms, or just simply have an eye around at the fandom article and the sheer amount of support conventions and gatherings did.
Focus on The Wiki: Theories and suitability
It's time to rip off the band-aid, cause is this even solvable? One may say that wikipedia is not meant for fandoms, and it'll never be a home, but I'd like to agree to disagree (partly), cause I believe that the main problem is that we are unable to document a much more personal aspect of that fandom, and we cannot grab them from their ankles and run-a-marathon with it! Theories make fandoms another unsuited gentleman, but we have one play-down: Conventions! a full-fletch event with pictures to take, and media to reputate and pave way for nobility; so, we encourage all editors to check them out today!
THE SIGNPOST · IN FOCUS
By yours, truly, CatPencil
Discuss this story