Talk:Utah Furries

Lots of information posted in the "Utah Furries" article is not quite correct. After attempts to fix said inaccuracy, the page was Locked.

It doesn't appear to be locked, I just edited it. Equivamp^talk 19:20, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

the page appeared to be unlocked for a while, then locked down again

No, it's not. Ignore that template, I don't know how it keeps ending up on the page, but just ignore it. Equivamp^talk 23:31, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

Thank you, we are glad to have the page open to edit so that the information about this group will be accurate. We're sorry that others had to step in to fix all this, but its awesome now! -FrosteeFox--FrosteeDFox 05:35, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

yes, thank you so much! We are grateful you helped us make the information more correct, hopefully this page wont be a problem to you anymore --Lrdkazul 05:38, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

Ok, the page was correct, and had good formatting, please stop reverting back with no explanation, because of this, errors are again persisting in the article. I am going to undo back to what was fixed last night I dont want to have to get any of the collabs etc involved anymore if I dont have to--FrosteeDFox 16:10, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

For anyone who reads the discussion, the revision at 20:12, 14 July 2011 is the best to date, and is accurate.--FrosteeDFox 16:15, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

As I said to Eliaphir in chat, you guys need to start providing some evidence one way or another if you want edits to stick. Probably you need to more specific as well, saying "X started A but Y started B". Get to a version that everyone can agree with. Otherwise it's just going to be "X is a creator" vs. "No they're not" for another week/month/year. --GreenReaper^(talk) 16:25, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

I can understand that. FB is not the best place to get evidence, but Kazul will work on it for us. Its pretty hard when it someone's word vs, another, but we have some documentation saved that we can link, etc. Kazul and I feel bad that this article is giving you guys grief, hope we can settle this soon.--FrosteeDFox 16:42, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

A lot of the information at first found was not pertinent to the conversation; that being said, when I have time to actually run down and build an extensive history I will use your information and add opinions of individuals that will balance the article out so it's not so spiteful (as it is now, it's looking better, but when it first was up a lot of information was done in spite). Anyway, that's the way I want to do it and if my edit is put up (has to be approved by the other two admins), then there should be no problems. You guys will get what you want to say out of the way, and we will get to say what we want to say. But this is not YOUR group or YOUR page so you can't have it completely one sided like you had it before hand (which is why I reverted it back to the original). It is ours (meaning everyone in the community), and hopefully you guys can get past your walls and we can get bast ours to work to find harmony. ~ Elias

P.S. It would be helpful if you wouldn't postpone all edits until later this evening when the new version is up. Let me remind you, this version (if I have my way) will include all of the information (at least most of it) that you included in yours. It's just going to be way more balanced. I've already started writing it and have quotes from individuals and proof that those quotes DO exist.

We are satisifed with the revisions that are on the page at this time. While we note that this not 'our' page, we will correct any errors so the account is correct. --Lrdkazul 19:42, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

The admins will visit to see if we are satisfied with it, which I am not. We will also correct any errors presented on your end. - Elias Saphir