I have to agree with you Schmiezi. 
In my opinion the article was poorly written shallow clickbait and not nearly worth this much drama.

The only thing I find remotely interesting is why did they choose Sherlock as an example instead of say, Supernatural or even The Avengers.

Liberty wrote:

I suppose Sherlock is quite a famous (and historical) example.  Spock/Kirk is probably more famous, but less current.

True. Yet, not even mentioning Spock/Kirk feels a bit like explaining what a lightbulb is without mentioning Edison.

I read the article, and i didn't see anything wrong in it. It just states that, for some fans, nods and subtext became more important that what is actually shown.  You can see sexual tension ( or you can not see them, as ReReader and a bunch of other fans do), you can see nods, but you can't see "actual" romance.
And that's what is a net phenomenon, the way fans massively get involved,  project themselves and use their imagination. I didn't read it's about being lunatic or not, imagination is good, invention is good, and the article doesn't say it's not.
 

Really glad this is finally getting back on topic.

Please keep Johnlock arguments to the relevant Johnlock threads and on those, please remember to be polite and kind to one another!

I find the article quiite distasteful and offensive and poorly written. I definitely think they should have referenced some other famous ships and I felt like it came across as making shippers out to be a bit weird and was mocking them somewhat. I'm not a massive Johnlock shipper by any means. I ship them for fun and I enjoy reading fics and looking at fan art, but I don't ship them for real within the show, as in, I don't think it will ACTUALLY happen...but I certainly wouldn't be upset by any means if it did. But even as a 'medium' shipper, I found this article a bit not good.