case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2017-11-11 03:18 pm

[ SECRET POST #3965 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3965 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 54 secrets from Secret Submission Post #568.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
type_wild: (Tea - Masako)

[personal profile] type_wild 2017-11-12 11:00 am (UTC)(link)
No. Those websites weren't held to academical standards, weren't ravaged by edit wars, weren't expected to keep an objective and neutral language, didn't have to follow a uniform design pattern.

Browse around these sites for some idea about what it was like. Wikipedia will amass more, and probably more accurate/less subjective information. But it'll never replicate the sheer devotion of the individuals behind these websites.