Talk:Human

From WikiFur, the furry encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is a current featured article candidate. A featured article should exemplify WikiFur's very best work, and is therefore expected to meet several criteria. Please feel free to leave comments.

Hehe, pretty funny :-) I'm willing to take a look at the original page, and make sure it's well translated, but the lack of a link to the source complicates things a bit. Could somebody give me a link to it? -- Vadim —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.58.11.44 (talkcontribs) 00:42, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

You mean to Wikipedia:Human? --Kris Schnee, redefining "Human" since 2006. -- 14:45, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Origins

Do we really need this creationist sticker here? I thought these would only appear in school books of some backwood districts... --131.220.244.38 20:34, 20 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I would agree that we can leave out the creationists, or would that be considered incorrect in aforementioned districts? (If we leave them in, why not mention Erich von Däniken too, with his theories that humans are descendants of aliens?) --Unci 21:03, 20 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Because then we'd be leaving out FSMism and the Periodic Table Controversy!
I've tweaked the language at the beginning of "Origins," to lead not directly to the article "Creationism" but to "Creation-Evolution Controversy." Rather than including exactly one religion-based idea and being biased in that direction, a link to "controversy" is a milder explanation of why this subject gets people so riled and exactly what the dispute is.
And, the "backwoods districts" aren't so obscure. Dover, PA is pretty close to a city I've lived in.
--Kris Schnee 11:31, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This quote does not contribute

MAN, n. An animal so lost in rapturous contemplation of what he thinks he is as to overlook what he indubitably ought to be. His chief occupation is extermination of other animals and his own species, which, however, multiplies with such insistent rapidity as to infest the whole habitable earth and Canada. -Ambrose Bierce,

If you want it so badly in the article make a separate section for quotes about humans beings. It and others like it do not belong at the top of the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.176.248.233 (talkcontribs) 22:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Race

Maybe I'm nitpicking a little here... but there are no subspecies for modern humans. The different races of humanity are not actually considered subspecies by most biologists. The "Human" article on wikipedia got this right, so the wikifur article should too! ;)

/ B.S. in Biology.
// Not an expert.
-Codalune 22:56 and 22:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article update #1 (April 17 2009)

Updating the entry's appropriateness status. Keep or delete? - Spirou 02:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Keep Although the section "Humans and furriness" is probably the only section that's really on topic for the wiki. --Rat 06:24, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Delete. I can't imagine a guy which would come to WikiFur to read article about a Human. This article can't be informative. It will always consist of affirmations of obvious. OckhamTheFox 00:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Article update #2 (November 1 2009)

Updating the entry's appropriateness status. Keep or delete? - Spirou 23:33, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Article update #3 (March 6, 2010)

Updating the entry's appropriateness status. Keep or delete? - Spirou 00:41, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Keep. Human characters are significant for more mainstream furry works (such as Disney movies, animal fiction...), and many furry characters from fiction are transformed humans. Also, furry and human racial relationships is often major topic. EvilCat 14:45, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Keep for the same reason as EvilCat said, plus the fact that the furry fandom is actually comprised of humans-such as myself-some of which have done very notable works and might even deserve mention on this page. --TwilightShadow 05:23, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Article update #4 (Feb. 11, 2011) (Keep)

I'm ROFL'ing over an article that is tagged both {{FAC}} and {{appropriate}} at the same time. Having said that, I think the article has been sufficiently edited to focus on the human-furry connection, leaving out all the stuff that is best suited for Wikipedia. Enough historical votes to keep. I'm casting my own vote to keep as well, and de-tagging it for deletion. ---CodyDenton 12:23, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Personal tools