Talk:Baked Furs (group)

From WikiFur, the furry encyclopedia.
(Redirected from Talk:Baked Furs)
Jump to: navigation, search

What year was that party held? --Tom Howling 21:22, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Hey, Fel, how about scanning that badge graphic, releasing it under an appropriate license (such as the GPDL, and posting it to illustrate the article? --Tom Howling 21:22, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)
MKerris (talk) posted the following to the main page: "It hasn't been completely 'private' -- has existed for quite a while, though it's usually quiet." I moved that comment here, to the Talk page. --Tom Howling 19:13, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Baked Furs vs Bakedfurs[edit]

Given that I am a co-owner of #bakedfurs (+q) and I created the site in affiliation with the #bakedfurs channel, I challenge that: "Revert. Baked furs (group) is different enough to Baked furs (site) not to warrant a merge. Start new article (". While may deserve its own stub or page for being a site it at least deserves an offsite link (given there is one to the forum on my portal site) and clear position in the history section of this article. Furthermore, to quote: "The Baked Furs were initially a parody group in the early 2000s, created in response to the Burned Furs and its (serious) counterparts, such as the Freezing Furs" and shortly after: "No further intended use of this group was further considered beyond this particular room party."

That does not consist of a group; that's a party. If there is a 'group'; the collective members of the LJ community, dopedup_furs,, the two #bakedfurs and all drug using furs that identify with the label are its composite. If anything, in my most humble of opinions, the party should come under the heading 'predecessors' or 'precursors' and the entities involved in the actual culture ought to be explored under 'History'

Awaiting your approval, —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Karmafoxx (talkcontribs) .

"While may deserve its own stub or page for being a site it at least deserves an offsite link,"... Well, normally we don't add an external link if the referred article as an internal link to begin with (it would kind of defeat the purpose of keeping the initial information on the Wiki;) As for the 'predecessors' argument, it would be valid if there was an ongoing connection between the initial parody idea, group, party, and its eight years removed, in name only counterpart. As it is, gains more as an standalone entry, with a referral on the initial entry, instead of being a later minor footnote in it - Spirou 03:48, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Makes sense to me, thanks for the revisions. Karmafoxx