Talk:Kid Radd

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

Right, I am kind of wondering if their is a template for, "the writing in this section is choppy and hard to read". Mostly for reasons that are not so much violations of the style guide, so much as violations of high school English class. Yeah, going to return to this to fix up some readability factors later, though, others are welcome to try their hand at fixing some of these issues. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KatrinaTheLamia (talkcontribs) .


Someone, please correct me if I'm wrong, but this is written more as an essay or research paper instead of a wiki. For this reason, if I'm right, I'll conform it all completely, without positive connotation and in the right style. Please respond if this is true.

Zhael 04:14, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah--I have heard complaints similar to this before. Honestly, I have no clue what people are talking about when they say this sort of thing. I mean, from what I have gathered, there is essay/research paper style, narrative fiction and "blog post" for how to write something on the web (ignoring the whole "business letter" style). I have seen the "essay/research paper style" complaint on a few other wikis. I confess complete nd total ignorance as to what they are talking about. I am going to have to ask for some sort of source on this style matter, or to have them pass what they are smoking. I mean--I admit, there are issues reading this, but mostly because I wrote it, looked back at it--and it looked like a really bad high school level paper (think: high school play type quality for a comparison).
Confirm what you mean by essay/research paper style... and why it is bad on a site that is an encyclopedia. Until then, I am going to merely guess it is a generic complaint about articles people do not want on these sites... as well... that is the only idea I can come across as to this "it reads like a academic paper" or "it reads like a blog post" really mean. --KatrinaTheLamia 04:07, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
It's subjective. It's also poorly written, to the point where I sometimes have to exert effort to figure out the intent of the words. To take a couple of examples:
  • "did some fairly impressive stuff" - what stuff?
  • "Kid Radd used original characters rather than the usual idea of the time to use recolours of Megaman or SonicTheHedgehog. Instead, choosing to make use of original game characters." - didn't it just say that?
  • "most places on the internet will have a few people that will recognise the series known as Kid Radd." - really? Would someone unconnected from the topic say that?
  • "JasonTheEchidna has done some rather impressive tweaks and modifications that have presented a workable viewer. Due to his desire for perfection on the viewer." - "rather impressive" is subjective, and the ordering is the wrong way around. The second sentence should go first.
We don't particularly care who writes an article, but if you make extravagant claims, you need to be able to back them up. And you need to be able to use basic grammar. You can't just, sprinkle commas, everywhere or put a full stop when you run out of breath. Then continue and expect people to understand, what you are saying. --GreenReaper(talk) 04:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
On the "being subjective" matter, this would require a "citation tag" being applied. Please, follow your own guidelines.
On the recolours remark. You need to understand that in many of sprite comic communities of the time, AKA, the context of when the series started, original characters consisted of a Megaman recolour with a new hair style. Here we are moving into the realm of Anthropology studies.
No somebody unconnected from the subject would not say that people will recognise it on most places on the net. Likely because they have never thought to ask about it, because they are unconnected. You, sir, have demonstrated a wonderful Catch-22.
I also have to question the practice of writing an article from the view of somebody who does not know the subject hence the "Would someone unconnect from the topic say X" query on it breaking the article. Because then we move into the territory of the Catch-22 of an article being written by somebody that does not know the subject, and an article having little tidbits of information that somebody knowing the article can put in.
You do have a point on the JasonTheEchidna doing some "rather impressive" things. I will likely remedy this. I was up until now, not going over a large amount of the technical details on here--but if this is what I should be doing, then, I will. However, this also gets the result of it being more unreadable.
Also wonderful use of "Murder, Arson and Jaywalking" item with the Grammar spot on at the end. One that you did not put a single example of such a thing existing. I mean, you do have a point on the other ones--this was just icing put on that you did not back up. Also, we are running into an issue of definition as to what you have when you see a comma (,) or a stop (.). I admit, there are a few issues in the article that do have issues. Though, when there are issues, usually commas misuse is tacted on as form of useless complaint. This complaint works because when people hear it, that get the image of:
"so like i went to the mall and bought some shoes they did not fit so I got a refund and everything was good."
Or at least, that is how I understood your complaint of reading this as. Which, the article does not read anything like such.
Apart from issues dealing with citations and possible misuse of commas (of which you have failed to show any examples of), you have failled to demonstrate any issues with the article. Sorry--this is not flying with me. --KatrinaTheLamia 05:01, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
You misunderstood the Megaman example. I wasn't questioning the value of the information. I was pointing out that you had said it was original twice. Like "I admit, there are a few issues in the article that do have issues."
Two of the examples I gave have the problem with full stops. You say I didn't give an example of comma misuse; you're right, I didn't think I had to when the very first section begins: "Starts of, demonstrating many . . ." (perhaps you meant something like "The comic starts off by demonstrating many . . ."?)
I'm sorry that you find my demonstration of issues inadequate. All I can say is that the first instinct of both Spirou and myself was to throw the article out rather than expend effort trying to fix it. This is quite an accomplishment. The article is written in an inappropriate and confusing style, spends a lot of time waffling about trivial details, and the overall quality of the writing is terrible. If you do not understand what I mean by "poorly written", I suggest starting here.
In short, we don't want it as a WikiFur article — not only because the topic appears to lack relevance (the worst flaw, because it's unfixable; that's why {{appropriate}} was added), but because it's poorly written. You are welcome to write how you wish on your own website, but here we expect you to use the English in a way that everyone else understands. This is true in any collaborative environment. Otherwise, you're just making more work for us to bring it up to code - work that we're not particularly inclined to do for an irrelevant article. --GreenReaper(talk) 06:04, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
You know--I find it coincidental that this subject matter (Kid Radd) has had this instinct gained on every wiki on the internet. Heck, there was even a debate to have it deleted from TvTropes. Usually with it being entirely on instinct. When people give examples that they cannot back up really beyond that point, they say "well, I am sorry that example did not work" generally avoiding elaborating this. Just an observation I have had.
On the Megaman example, okay--the issue is one slotted to the department of redundancy department. You could simply say this. And yes, I have gone through, and fixed that issue--as the history shows.
Ah! Okay... I call periods (.) stops. This, in writing is typically referred to as the flow of thought. Which I will go over it again, and fix this.
Going over the wikipedia writing style guide so far from stuff I have done today include:
* gained strategic distance. Yes, I agree there were a few things fixed here today.
* Longer Term Self Training--yeah, this is why I assumed you had issue with commas here. As typically, in most stuff I have written in the past, the two issues cited have been comma use and screwing up of tenses. This kind of got in the way of your suggestions, BTW.
* Wikipedia as a training resource... well, in this community I have not had a chance to do much here. However on Wikipedia itself, I have generally done this enough to find that most of the staff tend to be poorly trained, having only marginal qualifications and tend to be inconsistant with how they deal with various issues. Having an article listed as "irrelevant material", even though the subject matter has appeared in many other articles (include several in a famous last words article).
* Will do an attempt to eliminate redundancy. This would have been much clearly your issue if you had expressed it earlier as such.
* Fixed some flow issues in today's history. And thanks to the distancing, I managed to notice a few of these. There are likely more, that I will notice tomorrow on this matter.
* a single listing issue was presented, and fixed.
* Misplaced Formality was pretty much a nonissue here. Though it seemed, from the talk page, this may have been the biggest offender.
As per the appropriateness... we are dealing with well... an "SCTV is not Canadian" issue here. Most of the people behind Kid Radd, have been furry. The current rendering engine that is being worked on by JTE is based on the Muddasheep renderer (as oppose to the KidRadPlayer), and pretty much all of the writers and content creators have been furry. Heck, it was even originally a place holder for a comic about anthropomorphic rats in high school. Never mind that Bogey, an Anthropomorphic Plant character has even gained a form of Mascot status to the series. I mean--what the heck do we have to do, pull a Bob and Doug MacKenzie type move, to have this considered "furry" (to get this reference, it is best to look into the history between the Canadian Radio and Television Commitee and the television series, SCTV).--KatrinaTheLamia 06:25, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I wonder why a non furry comic (sprite comic, to boot) is even displayed here. This is WikiFur, after all.

I mean, just thinking: You can use all the semantics, passive-agressive attacks and walls of text to justify yorself and tell the staff how to do their own job, but if Kidd Radd's own creator didn't bothered to plug it here, it must be because it never belonged to a furry Wiki on the first place? I'm not saying that Kidd Radd was a bad (It was decent for a sprite comic standard) but what does it have to do with Furry comics anyways? If the comic had fans that just happened to be furries themselves, fine. But that still doesn't makes it officialy Furry, as everyone knows that a fan's opinion is always subjective and never can be compared to the author's opinions.

Ambiguous Tag Complaint[edit]

Okay--this is the second time a page has been tagged as "not right" without any bloody information given on the matter. So far I have "personak essay" and "not appropriate" tagged to this.

A few issues I see with this:

  • This is a site dedicated to information on a subject. I am kind of at a loss as to what the alternative would be here. As I have yet to figure out how to post interpretive dance onto a MediaWiki article.
  • The link to where to get more information... sadly... fails. No such information on to why this is not in anyway appropriate is there. I mean, unless you mean to throw up the argument of "it is not furry enough"--though, that raises issues, as well, the series has been heavily influenced by Sonic The Hedgehog and Megaman thanks to the community--most of which are furry. I mean--the community has had, in its grouping: several Sonic fans... a "kirby"... a scalie and what is referred to as "an anthropomorphic tasty". I mean--short of pulling a Bob and Doug MacKenzie type move like SCTV, I have to ask what the issue is here.
  • Implies a bias. If this article is bias, I would kind of like to figure out what you think makes it bias. I mean, I would.

So... in short... on the meta on this, I am going to need to do a citation needed here. Just something that has irritated me on a _lot_ of wikis I have been on.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by KatrinaTheLamia (talkcontribs) .

Okay, this is why it was that as such: It's a mess, un-furry/non-furry common, hard to read, offers no context to the reader, reads like a high school essay, gone wrong in very multiple ways, in other words, not an article appropriate for this wiki - Spirou 04:48, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
I think you may be having issues expressing yourself on this matter. Yes, it is poorly written, I will go through and try to fix that, once I figure out what the issues are. This consists of one of those articles that does not have any obvious syntax issues, but still somehow has reading issues to it.
And going to ask for a citation of the unfurry element. A large proportion of the community has been furry. Which in effect has shift the series from being rather unfurry to territory that gets a lot more furry as things go along. Mostly in that, from various inside information I do have, it has started to run more heavy parallels into game series like Sonic and Crash (where as the only Mario connection is a single Super Mario Brothers 2: USA parody that appeared). Considering that the characters are all video game characters, with one of the big names in the series being an anthropomorphic plant (enough that Bogey has gained enough mascot recognition as Kid Radd amongst the people following it).
Again, I am going to say that this is about as nonfurry as SCTV is not a piece of Canadian Content. We have had work on it by JasonTheEchidna, Muddasheep and myself. For a while, the IRC channel was that particular network's domain for Kitsune... then it moved into Sonic fans. I mean, of the IRC channel's demographics we have had: an Echidna, a Lamia, two Pichus, A Mintsune (Minty Kitsune), several normal Kitsune, a vampyr and an anthropomorphic tasty. This is an example of a community that was taken over from the inside by Furries. So, if this is not furry, then SCTV is not a Canadian show.
On the no context... citation needed tags would be what is used here... not a "not appropriate". Follow you own damn guidelines.
And, if you are going to be able to say "gone wrong in very multiple ways" you need to cite why you think this. I mean, if I can be taken down for not giving lists of examples as to my point, then you are just as fallible to such a prospect.
So--in other words, until you explain the leg (or tail) you stand on, and stop using subjective reasons yourself, I am calling bullshit. --KatrinaTheLamia 05:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
The comic and game described in this article do not significantly involve anthropomorphic animals, so they're not furry. That makes it off-topic for this wiki. Comixpedia might be more appropriate, at least for the sprite comic. --GreenReaper(talk) 06:13, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Right--the entire community is run by furries, and the characters are almost direct ripoffs of characters in Sonic The Hedgehog and in the development works Crash Bandicoot. To the point you'd nearly have to be blind to miss it. One of the two main mascots is an anthropomorphic plant. I dunno, I am going to assume that if I made a human-esque character and named him "Rodney Rodent" this would require everybody to believe that it is not a complete rip off of Disney using the exact same logic presented here.
But then, I have heard people argue that Sonic is not furry either.--KatrinaTheLamia 06:35, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Figured I would expand the analogy
Suppose there was a comic that was run entirely by a community of furries. It featured a human that was named Rodney Rodent. The supposedly human character acted and behaved in a manner almost exactly like a certain Disney Property.
If you can flat out say, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that such a comic would be exempt from listing on this site, I am going to withdraw from this debate. --KatrinaTheLamia 06:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
That's a human behaving like an animal behaving like a human. Do you see the problem? The reason Sonic is furry is because he acts human but is actually an animal. If you take that away, it's not furry anymore. --GreenReaper(talk) 06:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
I would like to point out, that the main argument for Sonic not being furry itself, is that Sonic does not have any animal traits apart from the spines on him. I kind of had a fun debate about this elsewhere on this internet. Some suggest that the only real definition that implies furry is modification of the face (though, that kind of makes me not furry). Though, this gets confused by the characters of Kid Radd not having faces (well, beyond ears, eyes and hair. Typically they have no mouths--and the style guidelines indicate that they have no nose). So, I am going to withdraw, and agree that a line can be drawn here. You likely have seen my update on the policy guidelines. --KatrinaTheLamia 07:13, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Original Author votes for deletion[edit]

After thinking about it, I have decided that leaving this up kind of opens the door for a few other spots that may not be desire able. I have made a proposal to add to Wikifur:What_Wikifur_is_not. Generally taking the effort to more solidly present the context required for such a site.

Well--it is good that such an issue came up now, and can be put into the guideline section. Sort of allow us to have a case as precedent to the line on "what articles are not relevant". I am happy with the resolution I did here myself. I doubt too many people will have issues with this. --KatrinaTheLamia 07:01, 15 March 2010 (UTC)