Talk:Fur Affinity

From WikiFur, the furry encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
Fur Affinity is a featured article, which means it has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the WikiFur community. If you see a way this page can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, feel free to contribute.
Discussion Pages

Cyberbullying concerns[edit]

I don't know. Fur Affinity is not a good site at all. The pornographic artwork there warped my husband's mind which breaks my heart. Tails refuge is not full of "friendly furs", just furries that will bite your head off for asking a simple question and threaten to bodily harm you. Whe nsomeone threatens you they get upvotes and I get a bad reputation for reporting them. What did I do? I am the victim! Not that idiot animal fucker Chinona! I hate her and her ugly snow leopards! And some prick has been stalking us all over the internet! One of the users on Fur Affinity even called me stupid and psycho when it's really HIM he's talking about. He's the one that likes to ruin kids shows like Pokemon and MLP with porn. They're kids shows, not shows where you can fuck animals. One of my friends even turned out to be a NSFW artist and it hurt me. Even one person who was helping me with personal things for years drew porn. And one user drew porn of AzureHowlSchilach's character WITHOUT her permission and it upset her and caused her to leave. Nobody reported it for sexual harassment which Fur Affinity doesn't allow. AAnd when I submitted a ban appeal on Tails Refuge, nobody would unban me. I am banned forever. Thus, i gave up tails refuge AND fur affinity forever. Nobody go to this site OR Tails Refuge if you want to keep your innocense. --FullmetalThunder (talk) 05:29, 16 January 2016 (EST)FullmetalThunder


The Mascots section of this article has significant overlap with the articel on Fender. I think trimming the mascots section to a line that Fur Affinity has two mascots, Fender (since date) a such and such, and Rednef (since date) a such and such, would work well. Thoughts? -- Sine 19:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Move Rednef to her article, the same as Fender, move their images and information out from this article to the new/existing ones, condensed "Mascot" section to the necessary amount of data?. Sounds reasonable Spirou 23:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Removal of "Fighting Amphibians" information.[edit]

Fighting Amphibian is in no way related.

I think the site should either have its own page and be linked as a disambiguation on the top of the page, or not be mentioned at all. It definitely doesn't belong on this page. Atte 00:41, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Fighting Amphibians has nothing to do with furries at all, there's no reason for it to be mentioned anywhere on this wiki. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .
I hate to correct you, but Fighting Amphibians is related to everything ever. It should be mentioned on every page.

Suggestion: provide dates[edit]

There are several places in the article where the word "current" or a similar word or phrase is used to mean "the present date". Unfortunately, someone reading the page (like me) has no way of knowing when "current" was. Too often sections of Web and Wiki pages are left unmodified for long periods of time, so that calling an event "current" can become extremely misleading when they are read months, or even years, after they were written.

A specific example is the list of current hardware. FurryWurry 21:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

FA Rank Info[edit]

Should information on FA Rank be included in this article or should the subject be given its own article? Either way, what information exactly should be included? SilverserenC 04:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

It's a separate, unaffiliated website, so it should probably get it's own article. The current external link can be converted to a See also if not explicitly mentioned in the body text. --GreenReaper(talk) 05:37, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Page created. Now to work on expanding it. Maybe I can submit it to DYK when i'm done? :D SilverserenC 05:47, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan. If you want to check out some of the new articles and grab a few other interesting tidbits, you could update the whole set. Drop a copy of the new ones here when you're done. :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 05:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
I've finished with expanding the article. I'm going to go see about updating DYK now. :3 SilverserenC 07:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Pull the "statistics" until they can be cited.[edit]

Information is fact-based. Putting up information like server traffic statistics which need to be spot on for accuracy without citing anything is just plain insulting to the reader, who I hope is expecting to learn accurate and reliable information. Statistics like those are up on that article, implying that they are true, despite the [citation needed] tag.

I can make up that my blog alone accounts for 99.9999% of all traffic on Blogger, but that does not make it true. Put this into your mind as you make edits like these that are dubiously sourced.--KentuckyFriedGunman 02:50, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Have you tried to look for sources for such information before removing it? For the most part, this information has been on here for a while and i've seen it mentioned on FA before. Dragoneer's journals would be a good place to look for statistics on FA, as he regularly puts up information about it. Most statistics are publicly accessible as well. I do not believe such information should be removed from the article until a thorough search has been made for sources. Wikifur is not Wikipedia and does not have such a stringent view on sources. SilverserenC 02:56, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
So, you're citing a LiveJournal as if it were a university-based study? What's with you people? I Googled site activity for FA and the only relevant, non-blog/journal/profile-based thing that came up was its Alexa page which does not support any of the statistics I cut. Can you find anything beyond a blog post? --KentuckyFriedGunman 03:02, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Are you saying that we have to use references that are from a university study about statistics for FA? You're not going to find it. Nor are you going to find such a study for any article on Wikifur, barring the article on furries in general. Blogs are, with a grain of salt, a reliable source for Wikifur. A blog made by the owner of FA about Fa's statistics is a reliable source. (And I meant his journals on his FA page, not LiveJournal, though that works too.) SilverserenC 03:05, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Remember what I mentioned elsewhere - WikiFur is sometimes a primary source of information. The user inserting the statistics happens to be lead of the Fur Affinity ops team. I believe he would be in a position to know the site's traffic.
Now, it would be nice if a citation were present; the fact tag is there to indicate to readers the information is not based on a cited source, and to encourage anyone who can to provide one. But our basis is truth, not verifiability - and so unless you have a particular reason to believe that they are not true, why remove them? (To me, the figures do not seem unrealistic given FA's size and growth over the time period.) --GreenReaper(talk) 03:06, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

FurAffinity and Furrocity joining forces[edit]

There's an announcement about it on FAF, but I'm confused, honestly, about what's going on. Equivamptalk 12:44, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

Given FurAffinity's delays in making plans come to fruition, it would probably be wise to wait it out to see what actually results from this announcement. It could peter out to nothing as some other revamp efforts have before. I wouldn't, for instance, suggest any article merge's until there's more to report. BlueOtter 15:18, 14 July 2011 (EDT)
I wrote a summary at Flayrah. It looks like Gavin and his moderators don't have enough to do at Furocity so they're joining FA's staff, with Gavin moving to the position of "co-owner" (gonna be fun to see how that works out, or whether Gavin threw in any other "resources" with that). No immediate changes to the site planned, other than perhaps stricter enforcement of existing photography policies. The term "merger" was a poor choice. --GreenReaper(talk) 15:45, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

content available to registered users only[edit]

Now some pages by specific users at Fur Affinity say "has elected to make their content available to registered users only." (example: username Reaver2kl4u) Anyone have reference on when this feature was added? Maybe a ref in FA forum? --EarthFurst 04:40, 13 September 2012 (EDT)

Fur Affinity Forums up and left[edit]

So, apparently Dragoneer did not actually own the forums, and its userbase (or at least whoever actually owned the server the forums were on) decided to split from Fur Affinity, and has rebranded itself "Phoenix Forums". There was a message left at the old domain, but that domain is gone now. I'm...not sure how to incorporate this into an article, though. Might be too soon to do so anyway? Thoughts? --Equivamp - talk 22:33, 19 September 2015 (EDT)

Tag Blocking[edit]

I honestly hate that they got rid of tag blocking. I'm sick of seeing poop, pee, and anatomically inaccurate genitalia in my feed. And so much child porn, I thought FA banned that? Somebody's breaking the rules here. DonutBandit (talk) 00:11, 16 July 2019 (EDT)

restriction on fursuit photos?[edit]

Article includes "While works of all ratings are accepted (other than photographic nudes,". Apparently there was some controversy (which I assumed was already in WikiFur's article ... but is not in article) about some fursuit photos. says "Because of some interest conflicts after 5 years of work on this platform, i decided to leave furaffinity forever! ... Telegram Images Channel: ...". Smoki's Bye Bye FA (photo of rope) uploaded to FA 7 month ago "posted Oct 6, 2022". One of the replies to that post was by Redtail (not an admin) who replies "... In order to protect minors and exploited persons, producers and hosts of pornographic media are held to very particular standards regarding record keeping of those shown in photography or videos." "Because pornographic material is poorly defined by law or precedent, hosts like this are under intense scrutiny to moderate content like this. ...". is another user who cares about the issue (does the "!" before their username on their userpage mean they now banned?) with their latest FA blog saying "This Journal Will Hopefully Not Be Deleted Dec 20, 2022 05:21 PM This is a link to a journal on DA that details what I've been observing over the last few months. And this is a link to an FA forum thread where you can leave a comm- wait, nope! It's already been locked. Wonderful. ..." (forum deleted so linking to version instead). One the replies to RestrainedRaptor's FA blog is RestrainedRaptor writing "All interesting theories... If only FA staff were willing to confirm or deny them, rather than shutting down every attempt to get an answer." --EarthFurst (talk) 16:44, 13 May 2023 (EDT)