Talk:Equestria Daily

File:Equestria Daily logo.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Equestria Daily logo.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:02, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Please note that I've fixed this. However, even though Shaun gave the logo to the uploader for "free", it does not qualify as a "free use" because with Twilight Sparkle front and center in it, it is a derivative work of the copyright of Hasbro, and thus we treat it as non-free. That means its still ok to use as a logo, but we have to be careful about its use. --MASEM (t) 14:12, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Criticism section?

For some reason, I feel Equestria Daily needs a Criticism section. While they are a notable site in the My Little Pony/Brony community, they aren't exactly the greatest in terms of submissions. A good example could be this thread... http://www.ponyfictionarchive.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=174

Some examples -On thread page one, one person had their story banned for six typos missed, and got a "Mmmnope" as an e-mail response. -Page 1, they tell people to go to Ponychan as constructive criticism. -On page three, one person was even told to flat out "go away" for submitting something.

I don't have any other sources, but discuss it if you like. Maybe I'm the only one who sees these things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blue64 (talk • contribs) 01:22, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Unverifiable comments on a PonyChan thread don't exactly qualify as a reliable source; how do we have any guarantee that the posters making these claims aren't just trolls looking to get a rise out of people? If a criticism section is to be added, you'll need stronger evidence to back it up than that. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 02:24, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for answering, I wanted to make sure before I edit or not. Guess this means no edit. Though I don't think they're trolling considering the posters on the thread are pony fans who submitted to EqD and shared their experience. Thank you again for the answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blue64 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I would also like to add in something for this, as this article makes it look like this is the only fansite while also sounding really biased. as someone who works on a rival site I feel really insulted reading this article and reading how people think sethisto is the savior of the brony community when he really isn't. That's my complaint. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.59.233.15 (talk) 19:39, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

While Equestria Daily is not the Only fansite, it is currently the biggest and most notable.COOLTUX345 (talk) 20:38, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

This is the article for the Equestria Daily fansite, not for the whole fandom, so to cover other fansites on this page would not make sense (except in circumstances such as conflict or collaboration covered by a reliable source), in my opinion. Clay^Clay_Clay 21:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Regarding attribution and submissions, I can also put my two cents in and second the request for a criticism section. I have submitted a number of news items that have all made it into individual posts on the site, but they have only once given me very minimal attribution and no link to the source, my own news blog, even though I explicitly asked for it several times. In one case they ignored multiple emails of mine even though the content was very much newsworthy by their standards and mine, probably because there was no way, in that case, to get around inadvertently giving attribution. There are several more news blogs in the fandom, the most notable one being Derpy Hooves News. Derpy Hooves News was founded (not by me) over a month before Equestria Daily, on December 17, 2010, as you can see from a whois of derpyhooves.com. They switched to Blogger only later. They have some 100K pageviews per month and are very committed to high-quality news reporting and giving proper attribution. I have chosen to remain anonymous to no further reduce my chances of being mentioned on EqD. Such is the nature of monopolies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.192.204.60 (talk) 17:01, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

As has been said before, whether or not you agree with it, EqD IS the largest and most notable fansite. And while DerpyHooves may have a significant amount of traffic, this article isn't about their site, and they haven't received the same level of mainstream coverage anyway; EqD wouldn't even have a page if not for the fact that it's received mention and discussion in multiple 3rd-party sources of repute. Either way, if you're going to add a criticism section, you're going to need to find a notable, verifiable source to support your claims beyond your own experiences or those of anonymous, unnamed contributors. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 23:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

I also believe that this page deserves a Criticism section. However, I believe asking for one just because your fanfic got rejected borders on 'egotistical'. There are however plenty of reasons why a Criticism section is deserved. I don't have sources but the unprofessionalism of EqD aggravates me enough to find a few possibly later, but nonetheless: (Note that these are but a fraction of instances that are grounds for negative approval directed at Equestria Daily as I can illstand visiting that website, but I still hear more facepalm-worthy news about them from other) For starters, I know the lack of a forum has been disputed. The staff behind EqD are incredibly slow with their updates in comparison to others, their lack of a forum is so they don't get beaten to updates. A user above me has Stated that they have given news and tipsnof news to EqD with near no recognition, this is what EqD does, they want to be first and only first which is impossible because not only are they beaten to all updates, they are slow to give news by nature. In order to keep up their user traffic, they will take advantage of people using a 'google-feeder' to check on the website updates, but most of what EqD posts is just fanart and fanfictions that arent relevant news. Nonsurprisingly, they are never the first pony-related news site to mention these. Secondly, I have counted atleast three times, possibly more, where the staff of EqD have posted 'leakedd' information and were asked to take it down. For a fansite that is an incredible display of betrayal to the makers of the show, especially as some of the show makers had sent stuff officially to EqD, it is honestly no surprise that they have stopped giving interviews or sending more stuff. Thirdly, the creator Sethisto is constantly making false updates with actual claims about what is to transpire on the show. If he were to make 'theories' it would b okay, very egotistical, but okay, but what he is actually doing is taking his own opinion and attempting to pass it off as fact, and then later making a new update wondering why he was wrong. The updates as a whole are starting to become 'blog' entries. There has indeed ben a whole scenario about their behaviour regarding submissions, to the point of making a flash game of them complaining about it, so to say that submissions arent an issue would be a lie on my part. Personally, it took me about a month to see how unprofessional the website was, and every now and then I see more things from google pointing to EqD posting lies and generally being a nuisance, and it is no surprise that the staff behind Friendship is Magic no longer contribute in any way to EqD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.180.48 (talk) 04:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Also, forgot to mention the 'Luna Game' controversy. It is a file that is meant to screw with your computer, placing fake 'shock' files in order to scare you. Equestria Daily uploaded this and put it on the front page urging people to download it BEFORE realising themselves what it does. Blatant disregard for userbase. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.180.48 (talk) 05:51, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Again, we can't take the unverifiable claims of anons alone. If you really think there needs to be a criticism section, you need to find a RELIABLE source to back up your claims. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 07:26, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

II'd hate to literally go out of my way to expose a website, partly because I don't want to seem like I'm on some crusade, and that it shouldnt need exposing because it is blatantly obvious of its 'unprofessionalism'. Sources fo all these claims can be hard to come by as the EqD staff actively purge anything that exposes their more negative attributes in their archives, so these will be cached first. Sources that are NOT hard to find are things like the Jayson Thiessen interview, which much of the fanbase have ridiculed due to how poorly it was organised and many people felt it gave bronies a bad image. There have also been much complaints of how Jayson was clearly uncomfortable with the attitude of the interviewers, from minor things such as their over use of terms like 'everypony' to fullon stuff like 'I GIVE MY BODY TO YOU'. Other sources will be the Luna game post, their NSFW approach (which also tied with a very relevant criticism regarding how the are representing the fanbase),, their falsifying information and leaks. There is also an incident involving Lauren Faust where EqD near-encouraged their userbase to pester her which eventually led her to reveal personal information she didn't want to reveal (I'd be surprised if EqD hasnt purged this from the archive). As I said, I will cache this and I feel it is worth doing so because no fan community with that much attention should devolve to such a stage, especially when it believes itself to be 'the' community. EDIT: I'm having trouble posting the links, but the ones I have clearly point to what I have specified, including reactions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.180.48 (talk) 07:51, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Equestria Daily.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Equestria Daily.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Equestria Daily.png) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:22, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Ursa Major Award

Equestria Daily just won the 2011 Ursa Major Award for Best Website, beating out WikiFur, Fur Affinity, Inkbunny and the Furry Writers' Guild's website (coverage on Flayrah and EqD itself). GreenReaper (talk) 20:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Merge into My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fandom

Please see Talk:My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fandom#Merger proposal. –Throwawaytv (talk) 08:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Please fix this reference error

(As of July 31, 2012)

• Ref #9, please correct the spelling of the author's name to Lisa Hix (also applies to My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic and My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic Fandom entries) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.131.249.24 (talk) 17:12, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

For the sake of posterity, I note here that this has now been fixed. Thank you for pointing out the error. ReecyBoy42 (talk) 07:29, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Restore Equestria Daily Article

Not sure if this is the correct way to go about this, but I propose to restore the article before the supposed merger seen here since it was made without any sort of consensus and given that the Library of Congress has archived the site as part of its Web Cultures archive, it is definitely notable. --DTM9025 (talk) 22:43, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

(NPP reviewer) @DTM9025 and Masem: The closure was improper (nom supervote, closer to no consensus particularly since !voters at the AFD -- where the result was keep over m/r, and which had more participation than at the merge discussion were not pinged), and the LOC archiving which has occurred after the merge discussion strengthens the claim on notability, but am not at all convinced that a full article is going to go much further based on available independent reliable sources -- so much of the article is primary sourcing (including interviews in RS). Suggest considering whether there's actually enough RS material to expand on, or whether a compressed version of this article would fit in a subsection of My_Little_Pony:_Friendship_Is_Magic_fandom#Online. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 01:22, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Looking at the references, I see only 5 out of the 16 references are of primary sources, so in my opinion, saying that so much of the article is primary sourcing is an overstatement. That said, I do agree that there is a gap in content in the article mainly due to the article being deleted for 5 years and thus missing potential updates and work needs to be done to flesh the article out. However, I do believe that there is enough material that this article could be expanded upon. I do believe that it warrents its own article as it is notable in that secondary sources have covered Equestria Daily and the LOC has chosen to archive it amoung other reasons. --DTM9025 (talk) 06:57, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorry "primary/passing" (interviews/quotes within a reliable secondary source are still considered primary - ref WP:PRIMARY, particularly Wikipedia:Identifying_and_using_primary_sources#Examples_of_news_reports_as_primary_sources). Good luck with sourcing/update. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 09:49, 27 March 2018 (UTC)