Talk:Paxil rose

Appropriateness of section on Wolfee Darkfang
I'm unclear why half this article is about Wolfee Darkfang. If this information is relevant - and I'm unsure that it is - it should be in that article, not here. Just because harassing one member of the fandom is the most notable thing this person has done, that doesn't mean it should be expanded to fill the resulting vacuum. --GreenReaper(talk) 21:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * According to several pages here, including Wolfee Darkfangs page and the article on the YouTube Furry War, the BeastForum ordeal was very much a scandal that many people are aware of. It wasn't part of the actual Furry War, however, should it go on the main Wolfee Darkfang page, it would be much more harassing than it is here. It being here, people would have to either know of me or the scandal and then go search for it to read about it, thus keeping any sort of publicity to said "harassment" to a minimum.


 * Considering the apparent notoriety of the incident I believe this section to be as relevant as any other article about a furry controversy.--Paxilrose 13:40, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I disagree with your assertion of notoriety. If Wolfee were an active participant, you might have more of a point, but the screenshot shows that he had made no posts or downloads there. --GreenReaper(talk) 02:52, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Take a gander over on the Furry War talk page, this was a an issue on par with the original furry war, with editors arguing whether or not it was the catalyst for the "second" war or the reason the first war continued as long as it did. Those other editors seemed aware of the extent Wolfee participated on YouTube, so the point is valid.


 * You're also missing the point entirely. Nobody's making the case that he posted or downloaded anything. The argument is whether or not he made it and the extent he went to to try and cover it up after it became an embarrassment. Again, look at the talk page, people that aren't "Wolfee hating trolls" hold the same opinion as I do in terms of relevance. Are we going to argue that they too are out to get him?--Paxilrose 04:50, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Requesting removal of information due to inaccuracy and unauthorized usage of my name
I request removal of info about me in this user's article, do to inaccuracy and unauthorized usage of my name. I do not wish my name be addressed in an article written by a manipulative stalking YouTube troll who has been trying to troll me since January of 2008. If there is to be a article about paxilrose on wikifur, which i don't think it quite fits in with the theme of this community in the first place, the article should be strictly about him and nobody else. Thanks you for your time.


 * I find Darkfangs request to be out of line. As stated, this is a fairly well known scandal involving him, and thus is as relevant as the Furry War page. The pictures are accurate accounts of events (the profile and admission, respectively) and I will point out Darkfangs own user page for additional information, since he's written quite a bit on the subject himself with far less references. Given that this is openly a user edited wiki, I strongly disagree that "unauthorized" use of his name is even an issue.


 * I also want to cite the user page of the furry known as Sibe. This individual has quite a negative reputation based on his actions, yet somehow these actions are deemed relevant enough to warrant being added to his page. The same standards should be held for Wolfee Darkfang. I, however, am at least giving him the privilege of not having it on his primary page (though if Sibe's antics are somehow important enough to be allowed on his page, I think the same should go for Darkfang).


 * If relevance to my page is the only cocnern, I'd be more than happy to make a new page for it. However, the admins of this site should make themselves clear whether this is an issue of relevance in regards to certain pages, or whether they believe some controversial members actions are acceptable material to mention and others are not and why they think that is. --Paxilrose 16:00, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * PaxilRose/I just wont to note tat Paxil Rose is a YouTube Troll who has been the archeenemy of wolfee darkfang for 2 years and will not put things to rest. Anything he adds to this wiki is going to be to slander me. Non of which is truthful information.--wolfeedarkfang 22:35, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The citations, screenshots and everything else beg to differ. --Paxilrose 02:24, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Appropriate?
I have added the "appropriate?" tag to this article, as I don't see that it belongs on WikiFur, even with WikiFur's lax requirements about notability. Looking at the external links (a YouTube account containing a mere 4 videos, months old, and some unremarkable FA threads), the subject is not a furry, and his claim to be "an internet commentator on furry fandom" is a stretch. C/O Google Alerts, this thread demonstrates he created his article here "for a joke", which casts doubt on whether his edits are being made in good faith. A look at his earliest edits also suggest he mostly created the article to take potshots at Wolfee Darkfang, with whom he seems to have an obsession.

I would suggest the article be removed and any bits relevant to the YouTube Furry War article be moved into that article.--Higgs Raccoon 10:06, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * If this was a "joke" article, plus the fact it is mostly a vehicle for his dealings with Wolfee Darkfang, agree on "appropriate" tag. This is not the proper forum or vehicle to vent his frustration, and fake articles, we already caught too many of them to let a self admitted one stay - Spirou 19:46, 29 December 2009 (UTC)