Deny-...He founded all that stuff and he is not notable to warrant inclusion? He BUILT the texas fur community despite texanfurs no longer being alive. I think that is rather note worthy. The successor forum would not exist if it was not for him. Some stats from the successor forum.
Total posts 93781 | Total topics 5132 | Total members 1121
I think that's a pretty notable legacy, even if he didnt make that forum himself, but did lay the foundation.188.8.131.52 20:11, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- (Copied from GreenReaper's talk page) I don't think you understand what personal exclusion is. That means that Kaffa Wolf went and spoke to GreenReaper and asked him to delete the page. Kaffa Wolf wants the page to be deleted. It has nothing to do with his notability. SilverserenC 20:27, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- (Also copied from User Talk:GreenReaper) I realize I'm new to WikiFur, and thus my opinion may not count for much (simply because I haven't been around long enough to completely understand the WikiFur culture. I'll try to sum up my thoughts carefully. I respect personal privacy, and I also understand that people may leave the fandom for various reasons. OTOH, I also know (particularly as a relative newcomer) that there is a need for a stable, reliable, credible archive to preserve the history and legacy of the fandom. WikiFur has been helpful to me in the past, before I ever dreamed of becoming an editor, for the fact that when I heard people talking about XYZ, I could easily go look up who or what they were talking about. Particularly in the case of someone whose contributions to the fandom are truly notable, it disturbs me to think that we can simply erase the record of their contributions and blank the pages of history for the generations that follow. Like it or not, when you step up to the plate and assume any notable position, you become a historical figure in your culture, whether it's the furry fandom or the whole USA. I'm sure that there are a lot of things that, for instance, George W. Bush or Al Gore wish they could delete from the record, but that goes against the whole point of recording their legacies (for good or for ill). So I respectfully have to disagree in this case. Notability has everything to do with it, because it is the yardstick by which we measure the importance of an article as a reference to the fandom. We may measure notability differently than Wikipedia does, but it's still a very relevant criterion.
- Is it possible that, as a compromise, we can offer someone the chance to "freeze" their page as it exists in a certain state (after removing anything that IS personally identifiable IRL) and put a banner at the top that the page is left in place for historical/archival purposes but is no longer active/editable? I know that WF stopped this practice some time back because people were not keeping their pages updated. In the case of someone retiring from the fandom, that's not a bad thing: we just want the history of what they did while they were here. Much like I could care less what Clinton or Bush is doing today, I'm only interested in what they did while in office. To the extent that a page (1) does not contain information that is detrimental to the person IRL and (2) provides valuable historical context, I think we need to strike a balance between the needs of the many and the needs of the few. Anyway, I've taken up a lot more space than I meant to, so I'll hush now. My own opinion, YMMV. --CodyDenton 06:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- That would be more or less what I had in mind when I said deny. There is already no personally identifying information on it, barring the car. And many people have that car.184.108.40.206 07:02, 16 July 2010 (UTC)