This page makes me weep. Seriously, the first time I looked at it I just kind of flinched and died a little inside.
I'm working on a rewrite that's less, uh, really horrible. plz do not edit. --Xax 10:31, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)
- The current revision as of a few minutes before this comment looks fine to me. --Markus 10:37, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)
- It's a very, uh, furry article. All of those bullet points are horrifyingly incorrect if you're used to the theological/real world definition. I'm still planning on rewriting, but someone else will probably have to go in after and merge the two versions into a more, uh, neutral whole. --Xax 16:11, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Why is the article link-to name (and its location on furry.wikicities.com) Anthropo'r'morphic when the article itself spells the term Anthropomorphic?
- Anthropomorphic is the correct spelling of the word. Article titles and references should be changed to reflect this. --Duncan da Husky 13:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- I noticed it when someone edited one of my articles with the incorrect spelling, but then found out it was a valid link. --Chibiabos 19:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, that was because we sometimes add in entries to catch misspellings (see the discussion for other reasons for this). You don't want to point to those, though, because that creates the possibility for double-redirects in the future. When this happens, the user will be forwarded to the first page but then will have to click through one more time to get to the proper page (this is to prevent infinite loops). It is considered good wikistyle to point directly to an article whenever possible. --Duncan da Husky 19:35, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Anthro as being distinct from Furry
Anthro, as a genre that emphasizes non-sexual, non-role playing anthropomorphic art, a sanatized 'furry' where people stick only to the art and actively distance themselves from preverted sexual furries? --220.127.116.11 15:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- The Problem is: You can't make a hard cut between an anthro and a furry artists. Some furry artists stick to clean stuff, Yerf/Jaxpad/Artspots would be a good example, while some socalled anthro artists are not unknown to go beyond "artistic nudity". It's all about the definition. Other people say that the only difference is that anthro art is more anatomical correct (more realistic) than toon-like furry art. That is (if you think about it) in some cases the contrary to what you said. --Yamavu 23:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)