Talk:Comparison of furry art sites

From WikiFur, the furry encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search

Most Wanted Information[edit]

Are there any other sites of major consequence? VCL, having nearly none of the features, doesn't seem to even qualify, but someone can add it if they want.

VCL is an art site (pretty much nothing but) - it's worth including, even if it hasn't modernized itself to add new features. Artspots should be included. And maybe Artpiles. Elfwood? I don't know if furries use it anymore. Back in its day it was basically like Deviantart, but fantasy-only. There were definitely furries on it when it hit its stride, but it's been a long time since then. 16:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

What about ArtSpots? --Douglas Muth 20:00, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Not there anymore, but we could do with some details for Weasyl. --GreenReaper(talk) 09:05, 9 October 2012 (EDT)

Content-based filtering?[edit]

Do these sites vary in their ability to filter artwork based on content? For example, would a fur be able to set his or her profile up to avoid snuff and vore? I'm unfamiliar with sites other than FA. Art submitted into FA is submitter-classified based on content and rating. Furs have an option in their profile to view or not view adult-rated art. (Adult furs have the option, at least.) However, they don't have the option to filter more specifically than that. FA permits warning thumbnails for edgy content, but leaves it to the submitter to generate these thumbnails and decide when to use them. BitterGrey 20:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, honestly, I've never been to any site that did that, 'to my knowlege'. I'll certainly look into it. Immelmann 21:30, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
One of Inkbunny's leading features is tag-based filtering as well as general ratings. You can even block certain tags when placed on work of a certain rating (and there are separate three-level scales for sex and violence). --GreenReaper(talk) 21:40, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
That's pretty cool. I'll make room for that.Immelmann 21:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Artists RSS feeds[edit]

Why not include those? ArtSpots supports them as well, at, they're just not advertised (which I think is an inadvertent bug in the new layout, I've reported it).

I understand we're low on space, but if necessary we could repeat with another table for secondary features - or perhaps switch to a vertical layout for features, with sites along the top. --GreenReaper(talk) 15:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Honestly? I don't want to redo the table into a vertical layout. That sounds like quite the pain and I can't possibly be bothered. If you or anyone wants to do that, then please, by all means. It'd make things easier and allow far more options. The problem, though, is that you can't have a sortable table that sorts by rows like that - it can only sort by column, like it does now. Immelmann 21:02, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Adjust headers?[edit]

I'd suggest adjusting the header of the "Ad" column; most people would consider "no ads" positive, FAIK, so having sites with ads get a green box in that column feels mildly counter-intuitive. --quoting_mungo 16:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I think as a feature, ads are a positive for those people who actually use that feature - the site and its advertisers. But it does seem odd to mention it as a plus when most features listed are aimed towards users. --GreenReaper(talk)
I view it as a positive thing because it allows the artist to advertise their work on the site. Integrated ads implies ads by and for the users of that site.Immelmann 21:03, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps there should be separate lists for features useful for visitors vs. artists (or this could be separate sections on a vertical list). --GreenReaper(talk) 02:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Is that an important distinction? I certainly made this chart with artists in mind. Maybe I'm not sure which would fall under which classification, under your idea.Immelmann 17:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
While artists are important users of a furry site, they are not the only ones. We should provide information on features of interest to each user class. Purchasable ads are a example of a feature of interest to one class - some artists may consider them a feature - but visitors probably do not. Indeed, as quoting_mungo notes, most people (including some artists) would instead consider having no ads a feature. This indicates that we need to list both as features for different classes of user. Developers might be another class - for example, I'm going to want to know whether there is an image API, and whether RSS feeds are provided. --GreenReaper(talk) 21:58, 23 September 2010 (UTC)