In Regards to Edits made July 18th 2016 by Sine
Why did you remove all the applicable categories the site was listed in, I only added the site to those it DOES INDEED apply to. I have even confered this article with GreenReaper.
Arizona Category = Site founded in Arizona, by 2 Arizona Residents, who Frequent Arizona Events, and even hold their own occasional Arizona Events. Chat Networks = The Site has extensive chatrooms, and instant messaging capabilities and services, on the website, and in the virtual environments we host. Chatrooms = See above Forums = We have an extensive forum system. Smartphone Application = We have a social networking application that bears the same name for our users. Social Groups = We have them, people can create as many groups as they wish. Story Archives = We haven an entire Bookshelf sections authors can post to, and anyone can read from. Websites = Well its a website dedicated to every member of the furry community for free, so go figure.
To whomever editted the furrtrax page, im not an expert on writing out wiki pages, but when you did the edit, you broke the links for the staff, they now go to blank pages instead of those staff members profiles.
Also you state citations or something was in order, im the owner and admin of furrtrax, i would be the one to know these things.
Also at the bottom you noted the furrtrax RIG, where as it is actually a real 2U flat custom built rackmount server, not a rig.
- On WikiFur, we generally do not link to user pages on the article about a site, unless they are being used as a reference for information within the article. Instead, the appropriate thing to do would be to create a stub about the subject (which you can start by clicking on the link), and place their FurrTrax user page as one of the external links on that new article; or, if an article exists, to add the link to it, like this:
* [http://furrtrax.com/indexsub.php?module=profile&user=1 DarkXander] on [[FurrTrax]]
- See WikiFur's style guide for more information about structuring an article.
- If you have a staff page, you could also link to that as a reference. This would aid other editors in updating the article without your input at a later date. This is one reason that references are preferred to relying on edits by individuals "in the know"; another is that it is hard for readers to see where this information came from and whether it is may be outdated without a reference (they have to track back into the article history). But, if no reference is available, it is better to have the information than not.
- You are welcome to make further edits yourself, bearing the above in mind. --GreenReaper(talk) 02:16, 27 November 2013 (EST)
You're just making stuff up aren't you
The assertion that a closed source application improves security is utterly ridiculous. Also it's "other than," not "other then." Than indicates a comparison; then indicates a place in time.
The editing of this artical shows clear bias. Combined with the lack of references and flagrant generalizations I recommend this article for speedy removal.
Why so offensive against me?
Why do you seem so biased against me? I just added a bunch of references and new information, you are insulting me and my post, rather than conducting yourself professionally. Instead of insults, please supply recommendations for changes. I happen to be the owner of FurrTrax, and noone else has stepped up to add it to wikifur so ive been doing so myself.
AS for your doubts about my security updates, read this and weep, i had outside security audits done by a professional company, Beyond Security(beyondsecurity.com) My references include: BEFORE: http://furrtrax.com/uploads/1/furrtraxsecurityauditcensored.PNG AFTER: http://furrtrax.com/uploads/1/furrtraxsecurityauditsecured.PNG DAILY TEST: http://www.beyondsecurity.com/vulnerability-scanner-verification/furrtrax.com
So the idea that a closed source application improves security is obviously possible, and true!