Talk:Furry Fashion

I have some concerns about parts of this article; they appear to me to verge on commercial advertisement for the sim. --GingerM (Leave me a message) 01:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Suggestions
(also posted to Amethysia's talk page) All in all, I think there's some very good information here, and I look forward to seeing more about it as you continue!--GingerM (Leave me a message) 03:46, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Instead of saying 'around' xx number of staff members and yy number of members in the community, I suggest something like "As of < >, FF employs x furs, and has a customer base of y." References could be a link to the group information on www.secondlife.com.
 * Regarding the claim of being probably the largest store, I'd suggest an article link from a reviewer or something, if you have one?
 * Digital Distractions - is that an artist or a business, and would there be a website or an in-world SLURL? Are they big enough or furry-oriented enough that a Wikifur article might be justified? Also, SLURLs for the sims might be a good idea, too, in the External Links section at the bottom of the article. Also, if any of the other staff have Wikifur accounts, it would be a good idea to provide wiki links to their User:Talk pages to make it easier to contact them.
 * Hi there GingerM. I've been called on by Amethysia to help neutralise and reformat her article. I've agreed with your points and taken into account my own Wikipedia editing experience to reformat the article.
 * I've overcome the first issue by referencing the said sentence, with a source and access date (you can see this under "References"). That should provide the much needed timestamp thereoff.
 * As for the claim, a review will be posted and cited soon in the source. Second Life does not provide such data upfront, but does have some backend statistics, unfortunately, those require administrative rights to access, so citing them here would be redundant.
 * Digital Distractions is another, standalone company in Second Life. So as for the validity of it needing its own wiki article, is pretty much up to its current owner (as for now, I've removed the ). As for the other staff members, they do not currently have such accounts, or at least have no talk pages to link back to, and it would be a little demanding to insist they activate such mediums. Anyhow, if they do activate their talk pages, further edits would be done to incorporate them.
 * I hope my edits and formatting have met your wiki standards. Should there be anymore recommendations, I'd be happy to consider and apply as accordingly.--Danamic Rhapsodos 12:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I saw your edits and all I can say is, "Thank you!" I think your wiki standards are higher than mine, from the evidence :D. I have seen an account here which I *think* is another of the staff members, which reminds me I ought to drop them a note and check, then I could link them. You've done an amazing job! --GingerM (Leave me a message) 03:29, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks a lot better. Well done! --GreenReaper(talk) 12:03, 19 February 2011 (UTC)