- Welcome to Wikifur. Wikifur entries, with the exception of a person's "user page," is editable by any and all, subject only to change when the edits are non-helpful in nature Spirou 16:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- No problem ^-^ By the by, you can add your signature on your comments by typing four tildes ("~") at the end Spirou 19:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I've been looking through some of the articles and feel that those made by the actual user themselves should be deleted and put into their user page.
And this person is caught my eye significantly. Not only is the article 90% written by the character, it is from a very biased perspective, lacks relevant information and has little interesting context, all of which could be in his empty user page. Very few other articles link to this (I haven't seen any as of yet). Also the grammar and spelling requires a drastic cleanup.
Of course notably, a small disproportionate amount is given concerning his ED antics, for which he is well known for both in and out of the furry community. And to be fair an external ED link should be included in my opinion despite the satirical content.
Though what irritates me the most is the users' hypocritic attitude. An actual quote of his (with screen caps on ED) recall him saying:
"How does it feel to be insulted by a man of pure intellect...that's right...YOU LOSE YOU FAG! can you PROVE i'm a fag when I CLEARLY straight and have a FEMALE mate, that's right you LOSE! YOUR THE FURFAG!"
Despite his bisexuality and interests in the furry community, he uses derogatory name calling constantly in conversations. This attitude should not be tolerated and as a result, I do not feel that this person deserves their own Wikifur page.
--I'm currently looking through other articles, though this character for his infamy alone deserved immediate recognition. Thanks, Jaimes.188.8.131.52 21:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- The policy on WikiFur is to allow users to edit articles about themselves and their creations, provided it can be done in a manner that reasonably complies with the editorial guidelines of the site, in particular the ones relating to neutrality. As for documenting the "negative" aspects of a person, we take a cautious approach to that. That sort of information has to be both accurate and relevant. For accuracy, that means references and verifiability are important, and for relevance, that a good case can be made why it is in the public interest that the information be made public. You make one good point here, which is that negative behavior as an attention-getting device should not be "rewarded". Finally, there is no rule that someone has to be a good person to "deserve" an article on WikiFur, and there are in fact several articles on WikiFur I can think of offhand about less-than-admirable people.
- With the above in mind, if you believe you can improve the article to make it more accurate, feel free to do so. --mwalimu 17:26, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- Look, I don't know what the hell is up with you people and your double-standard s***, but it had BETTER end PDQ. Your pissing and moaning about an article written by the person it's about, yet I see that same thing with other pages about people and nobody's gripping about them.
- Pick one or the other - it can't be fricken both! All hail VLADUZ - the EBAY IMPALER! 23:48, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
The article at one time included a controversy section (deleted in this edit).
Given my reply to another comment (see above) and the lack of external references, I decided not to restore the content in question. It is also something of a gray area with respect to the relevance requirement (if someone is guilty of making obnoxious statements to the extent of getting banned from a site, is that in the public interest to include here?).
Having said that, it is also worth noting that the most recent version of the article as of 21 May 2008 was reworked by User:Asylumfoxy714, who it appears may be Straitfox, and whose edits may be biased. In addition, there have also been several recent edits to add negative information about him (usually poorly written but in at least one case a reference was included) and to modify templates. Asylumfoxy714 actually removed a couple of them but that too I will let stand for now since the unreferenced tag was mostly with respect to the controversy section (the other was a cleanup tag, which IMO is still appropriate and has been restored). --mwalimu 18:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC) Commented edited --mwalimu 07:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- Asylumfoxy is Straitfox. Today his account has been attempting to delete various parts of the discussion page and the neutrality and clean up tags. Kinda funny really. :P 184.108.40.206 23:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- Straitfox is the article about you (assuming you are him, which appears to be the case) but is subject to public editing, review and scrutiny, and must adhere to sitewide guidelines such as neutral point of view and should be written in a straightforward, encyclopedic form. The article User:Asylumfoxy714 is "your" page where you are free to say almost anything you want within reason with relatively few rules.
- See WikiFur:Personal information and WikiFur:Personal exclusion for more information on our policies. Should you wish to exercise one of the options of personal exclusion or protection, in this situation it is possible it would not be granted. Given my involvement here in the past day I would recuse myself from making that judgment call and defer to one of the other admins here. --mwalimu 01:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes it is me Straitfox, Look you do not POST this stupid crap and I don;t care! People do not need to se these lies! So please refrain from posting such garbage! I can edit this myself. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asylumfoxy714 (talk • contribs) .
- As you might note by my edit, if there are facts, let them be shown. If there is cause to believe in this controversy, then it might as well be known. If you have performed any notable positive activities, let them also be shown. -- Siege(talk) 15:34, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- If you would have referenced the links in the previous revisions you'd have seen there is at least cause for a general controversy section. That being said, any warning at all is fine with me. Please do take the time to read the ED article with an academic mind, and update appropriately. Kerosuppi 20:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. The ED article is a good example (with an extensive amount of screencaps, art & chatlogs) that provide some accurate and valid evidence to act as references of his activities. His FurryArtPile & deviantArt pages have also been banned by moderators. 220.127.116.11 21:33, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey Reynard, your article is extremely biased and even has quite a few misspellings and poor grammar. Quite frankly if you don't want people to mercilessly edit something then just um... DON'T POST IT IN A WIKI! COMMON SENSE. And you don't need to be such a whiny douchebag when someone posts something you don't like. The world is NOT going to cater to you. It does not revolve around you. BTW http://rendardtalkstoself.ytmnd.com/ 18.104.22.168 23:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
- My article is no Biased...its jsut messed up with lies and crap that YOU people made up about me and its STRAITFOX....Strait, fox if you can't get that trough your thick head... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asylumfoxy714 (talk • contribs) .
- Please do not make stuff up here...this is retarded and stupid....please STOP! and guess waht I can post on Wiki when i want dumbass! and it does NOT have spelling errors or poor grammer, once again! You claim but I think its you troll who cannot get it....leave this place and do NOT leave stupid things on my page... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asylumfoxy714 (talk • contribs) .
- Sir, you do realise that you make yourself become trolled, you cause a lot of drama, and never stop, it is like to put out a fire with more petrol on it, I have read your ED article, and ED is not biased what so ever, the evidence is true, and I looked at links from numerous of the "trolls" you speak of, I think it is you that is a troll, and an immature child, if you do not like what is being put on your article, then act more maturely, and you will get the results you want, you are obviously being trolled on this wiki article(s) is because you react like a child, I also seen you saying "I win, you trolls lose" thats a brilliant way to make them come back to you, and I seen that on numerous of links that the "trolls" shown as evidence, really makes you some 5 year old infant --22.214.171.124 21:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Please do not make stuff up here...this is retarded and stupid....please STOP! and guess waht I can post on Wiki when i want dumbass! and it does NOT have spelling errors or poor grammer, once again! You claim but I think its you troll who cannot get it....leave this place and do NOT leave stupid things on my page....
I am not kidding...you will get it if you do not stop these attacks on my page...its just COMMON SENSE! And neither does the world revolve around you YOU! and I think you have illusions of granduer.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asylumfoxy714 (talk • contribs) .
- Straitfox, I have watched you "fight" these claims by repeatedly blanking sections of this page. Your comment above does in fact have spelling and grammar errors, as has the majority of your writing on this wiki, but that's beside the point. It's a wiki. Grammar is fixable. But you don't win on this wiki by burying other peoples' claims; in fact, you lose points every time you do this.
- And now you threaten someone over a few words you don't like. Your "foe", who claimed to be trying to help you, is right. You look worse and worse, losing face, further destroying your reputation, every time you refuse to let it go. It seems like you've based a major part of your ego and self-image on ONE little thing, and cannot see past it to recognize what you're doing to yourself. I have stated before that negative claims of fact need to be substantiated, but you refuse to allow others to provide that supporting information - if they even have it.
- Straitfox, you are an adult. You shouldn't need me to lecture you like a parent. You are not the only one at fault here, but you're certainly taking on your share. No more blanking. No more threats. You have been accused. Quit with the drama and do something rational about it, like digging up evidence that exonerates you, or behaving like you actually grew up after 22 years. -- Siege(talk) 23:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Final warning? What kind of threat is that? Hey, Stefan, remember me? You stalk me all over the internet, digging up my usernames just so you can harass me. Oh, wait, you do that to everyone that disagrees with you. You can blank and edit all your other Wiki articles, but you'll never get away with it at ED. Btw, it's four tildes, not rocket science. 126.96.36.199 06:09, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
- Ummm....I do not know who YOU are and frankly what you did was an act of agression and was frankly immorale, illogical and quite STUPID! Seriously what you are doing is playground bully and my warning still stands. and no one disagrees with me, they just hate my good , just you and the people at ED, just abunch of loser closed-minded idiots like you and and hey its called leaving me ALONE, Not brain surgery! But hey we all know you don't have a BRAIN! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asylumfoxy714 (talk • contribs) .
OMG! A retard said I had no LIFE! OMG! No I will enver die you stupid fuck you have no life leaving stupid comments on a discussion page. I have a life. I have everything I ever wanted! A girlfriend, a job, going to college. What do you do for a living oh that's right picking on defenseless people who know how to fight back I hope you get charged for what you do and go to jail you asshole. You are an asshole who has nothing. I have a life what about you? Oh that;s right you have nothing!!! Therefore I WIN! I always win. Asylumfoxy714 00:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)Straitfox