Talk:Onyx Forepaw

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

Heya Higgs,

I'm a newbie to the WikiFur thing, and these flags on my page, Onyx Forepaw, the one Equivamp made for me, I don't really know how to edit to confirm to the standards... Any tips you could give me so I can make my page better, hence getting rid of the flags? Thanks! c:

- Onyx Forepaw

(Moved talk from my Talk Page to here, in case anyone else has thoughts.)
For me, the biggest problem is the "Reputation" section, which seems very biased. For example, Onyx Forepaw is best known on the internet as BOLT’s #1 biggest fan EVER, being literally the world’s biggest fan of Disney’s film BOLT. is very point-of-view. Claiming you're a big fan of something wouldn't be a problem, but I don't know how you could objectively demonstrate that someone is "the biggest fan ever".
The entire section is one-sided and makes claims about others (eg "(she) decided that Onyx is unbeatable") which really need references.
The simplest solution, of course, is to move the entire section to your User Page, where there is no requirement for verifiablility like Article Pages have.
In addition, there are various sentences outside that section which could use references. For example, "At the time of its existence on dA, there was much argument about the couple", or "it had an enormous amount of followers".--Higgs Raccoon 00:18, 25 November 2011 (EST)


Aah, okay, I see c: Yeah, you can move some of that to my userpage if you wish, or I could edit a bit and add references (I'm getting to the references, I'm so close to finally finishing the page) :D As for some of these parts, the claims about others, I can find refs for them when I come to editing next C:

Google search image[edit]

Removed without explanation in November "[[Image:OnyxForepawGoogleSearch.png|right|thumb|300px|Appearing in Google Search suggestions, proving a large amount of people Googling the name of the fursona.]]". Inclusion of image seemed ok with me. --EarthFurst 20:48, 28 January 2012 (EST)

I guess I just didn't see what the relevence was, but I'd be fine with it being re-added. :3n Equivamptalk 20:20, 29 January 2012 (EST)

Exclusion request[edit]

The subject of this article has requested personal exclusion. If you wish to object to this request, please do so within 24 hours. --GreenReaper(talk) 07:41, 12 November 2013 (EST)

Banning from various art websites might be of note, but that's entirely unreferenced. No objection to exclusion. -- Sine 13:16, 14 November 2013 (EST)
Concur on Sine statement, but banning are so common now, they are (almost) hardly notable, except on extreme cases. Agree on user's wish for exclusion. - Spirou 17:34, 14 November 2013 (EST)