User talk:Higgs Raccoon/Archive 1

''This is an archived page. Additional talk should take place on User Talk:Higgs_Raccoon.''

Hi there, Higgs, and welcome to WikiFur! Thanks for uploading the image of the Nature Anthem video - let me know if you need any help not already provided. :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 19:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Recent Vandalism
Thanks for reverting last night's vandalism. I've blocked the offending IPs. --Douglas Muth 13:19, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks, Giza. --Higgs Raccoon 20:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey Higgs Raccoon, Rvddp2501 here, listen, thanks for repairing the maelstrom page, I appreciate your help - RVDDP2501 20:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rvddp2501. You're most welcome! --Higgs Raccoon 20:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

so your fairly new to wikifur huh? pardon my asking but what do you think of my Extinctioners pages, I really like to hear opinions and reviews to help me make them better. P.S. you can reply to me on my userpage discussion section, ok - RVDDP2501 22:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Administrators!
To make it easier for you to revert future vandalism, I've added you to the administrators group. You can learn more about the additional features now available to you in the See also links on the above page. Be bold! --GreenReaper(talk) 15:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * One of us! One of us!  --Douglas Muth 16:48, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

User 88.96.32.14‎ and the "Phillip M. Jackson" article
Hallo, Higgs Raccoon, the user you blocked yesterday ("blocked "User:88.96.32.14" with an expiry time of 3 days: vandalizing with irrelevent links",) while trying to post the "B3ta" link (which is an actual valid link,) may be Mr. Jackson itself.

I forgot to add that link when I created the article, and later contacted him by email to convince him help on his and the "sequential art" article. Whoever he may be, he was trying to post that valid link three times. Just FYI Spirou 08:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Dankeshen =) Spirou 09:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

New articles about people
Thanks for creating all these new articles about people! A couple of small points: -- Sine 17:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * "Soandso is an x who lives in" reads more smoothly, and is more grammatical, than "Soandso is an x living in"
 * fursona should be a WikiFur link, as we do have that article and it may not be a familiar term to readers


 * OK, thanks Sine, I'll start phrasing it as "x who lives in" in future, and make links to "fursona" if it comes up. --Higgs Raccoon 18:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

How to do bot vandal rollbacks
In cases of mass vandalism (page blanking and the like) it is acceptable to use the "bot" rollback method. To do this, go to the user's contribution page by clicking their name or IP address in the userlist, then add &bot=1 to the URL (or ?bot=1 if there is no ? already in the URL). Press enter to reload that URL, and then just open all the rollback links in new tabs. This will give the initial edit a "bot" flag, so that only your revert will be visible in recent changes. --GreenReaper(talk) 19:04, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Recent edit by 70.124.87.218
I believe this is probably Jake Gillaspie, given that the same message is posted on his GreatestJournal and that that IP has edited the article several times before. This being the case, I've unblocked the IP, so he can request exclusion if that is what he wants. --GreenReaper(talk) 22:03, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:FrizbeeFursuit.JPG
Hello Higgs Raccoon,

This is in regards to Image:FrizbeeFursuit.JPG. It has not been tagged with a copyright status. This can be a complicated area, so I can try to help if you need any. The Wikipedia Image use policy may give some background, but it isn't policy here.

Why was not a usable tag for this image:
 * The way I see it is that is sort of a "fair use" claim; a fursona drawing is a like a "logo" for that furry, so a low-resolution graphic of a fursona drawing is the only way to illustrate what the fursona looks like. Pictures of fursuits are not unique in that way; anyone can take a picture of one.

To deal with this image, there are a few choices:


 * If you are the copyright holder, release it under a free license, for example:
 * Public domain
 * Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
 * GFDL
 * If you are asserting that this image is usable under fair use, add an appropriate fair use tag. A very basic summary is that fair use is used for commentary, criticism and review on the image when no free image could be used instead. Some fair use tags are:
 * Logos:
 * Covers:
 * Comic panels:
 * If the image is already under a free license, provide information on the license, and tag the image if you can.
 * If you would like the image to be deleted, ask any administrator

To see a list of current copyright tags available on WikiFur, see Category:Image copyright tags If the copyright status is not resolved, the image may be deleted.

Unless you have a question for me specifically, I'd prefer responses on the page for the image. --Rat 01:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Edits to AussieHusky
Hi Simba. I notice you reverted the edits made to the entry on AussieHusky (and eventually blocked those who made them). Although it could have been written a little better (and was unreferenced), I believe it *was* a legitimate attempt to add to the entry. On the OzFurry mailing list, AussieHusky did claim to have made chocolates for the event, which were going to be given out as prizes at some point. -- Higgs Raccoon 21:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, the reason I blocked the person who made them was that as well as the fact that they created a nonsense article, and when that was deleted, registered an account and recreated the article. The edits to AussieHusky weren't enough alone (IMHO) to be a problem. It's a little unclear to me what exactly this person is up to as I got an e-mail asking for the ban to be lifted, and I replied saying if they'd stop creating nonsense articles I would lift the ban. I went back and read the deleted article and I don't see any other way to interpret what was there other than as a nonsense article. Simba B 21:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! (new award)
happy not a day day! ^. ._^ - cchristian talk 


 * Aww, thankyou! Mmmm. Cookies are so much nicer when fresh (as opposed to fished out of the local trashcan).


 * BTW, I know it's impolite to find fault with a gift, but is there any reason why "Congratulations" is misspelt? -- Higgs Raccoon 04:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the WikiFur Stub
Hello, Higgs! Just wanted to thank you for the stub entry you gave me (Andy Fox) on WikiFur. I ran into it and was surprised to find me here! The entry was nice, concice, and well-done. Good job!

125.23.59.203 : block or warning?
Hmm, would you say 125.23.59.203's math edit (to Tristan Thilorn) should result in a block or just a warning? --EarthFurst 15:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I wasn't really sure if it was vandalism, or just an attempt to edit that went wrong, so I was going to wait for a while and see if they tried it again. As they didn't return, I've just added the dontvandalize tag to their talk page. --Higgs Raccoon 20:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

64.246.18.83
64.246.18.83 that you blocked for a only week ( http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/ipall.ch?ip=64.246.18.83 ) was an open proxy. Deafleas 12:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

How do you tell if an IP is from Tor or not? I refer to ones that don't look like proxies and aren't shown as blacklisted by www.domaintools.com ? Deafleas 14:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't claim to have the network-fu to implement any of it, but Meatball Wiki has an interesting page on Tor proxy detection. DuncanDaHusky(talk) 14:39, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I sometimes look up the IPs on this page, which appears to give the status of the nodes in the Tor network. -- Higgs Raccoon 16:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

This morning's vandalism
Holy crap. Thanks for being on the ball with the vandals that came by this morning! --Douglas Muth 14:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, seriously appreciate your help :-) - RVDDP2501 16:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism on Feb 19
Thanks for being on the ball :) Really appreciate your hard work :) -- JaeSharp 10:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:CalafinFursuit.jpg, Image:CFACReadyDog.jpg
Hello,

The pictures Image:CalafinFursuit.jpg and Image:CFACReadyDog.jpg should have their copyright status dealt with, same as the earlier message on this talk page. --Rat 06:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Names . ..
Thanks for the catch there - serves me right for trying to spell someone's name right at 3AM! ;-) --GreenReaper(talk) 15:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:JRSchnauzerFursuit.JPG
The picture Image:JRSchnauzerFursuit.JPG should have its copyright status resolved.

Why was not a usable tag for this image:
 * The way I see it is that is sort of a "fair use" claim; a fursona drawing is a like a "logo" for that furry, so a low-resolution graphic of a fursona drawing is the only way to illustrate what the fursona looks like. Pictures of fursuits are not unique in that way; anyone can take a picture of one.

--Rat 07:12, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:PerroFursuit.jpg, Image:RingieRaccoonFursuit.jpg
These need the copyright status resolved. Previously explained reason for not using "fursona" tag. --Rat 06:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:TonyRingtailFursuit.jpg
Image:TonyRingtailFursuit.jpg needs copyright status resolved, same as the rest. --Rat 20:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Your edit
In regards to your edit, we don't totally revert people for good faith edits, even if they aren't familiar with our customs. I know that this editor is the subject of the article. Like GreenReaper says, we can discuss it, but just reverting the subject over what could be a reasonable edit can lead to frustration. --Rat 11:13, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I guess it depends on how you define "reasonable". When so much of an article is stripped (and the information is still online for anyone to look up), and done by an anonymous user with no explanation, it starts to look less like a good faith edit and more like subtle vandalism. --Higgs Raccoon 11:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand that. I do know that it is being edited by the subject though, and there may be privacy or accuracy concerns, though I haven't asked about the exact reasoning for the edits. I do think we should roll back to the subject's preferred version, and we can still discuss it after. --Rat 11:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. Whatever. If there are accuracy concerns, fair enough, but I don't see what concerns there could have been with links to his homepage or LJ, which require nothing more than quick google searchs. --Higgs Raccoon 11:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I can discuss it with him next time he's online. It's possible that we can end up putting some of it back. There's no rush to put it back though. We can have a dialog with the subject and then decide. --Rat 11:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Had a discussion. On request of the subject, removed real name from article, including history. The part about roommate not wanting a dog was reportedly a joke. LiveJournal not used anymore and will go away eventually. Website has changed to new domain. --Rat 02:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Edits on Brushwell Clinton
Hey. While I appreciate a total stranger making good-faith edits (Community is lovely. :) ) I removed the link to my very-very-old livejournal, as it's rather dead. :)

-Brush (Yup, I'm a rebel - I didn't log in! ;) )

(Ya, update - didn't notice the other edits. I'd ask that you ask before editing Brushwell Clinton, since it is, after all, about me, and it's also pretty rude.)


 * Actually, no permission is necessary. I would direct you to the text that is printed below the text box every time you edit something on WikiFur: "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here." That is the nature of wikis - they are the product of the community, not of one individual.DuncanDaHusky(talk) 13:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I honestly don't mind what goes on with the page, just as long as I'm satisfied with the result. While "satisfied" may seem a high standard, trust me, I'm satisfied 99% of the time. :P Per the editing notice: As the page is of a personal nature, I would gladly move it back to User:Brushwell_Clinton, since it appears all articles in the main namespace are public domain. If need be, I, being the subject of the article, will declare the text within it copywritten to myself. However, I'd much rather not do that. -Brush

Fe'ath
I've trimmed the description of Fe'ath, and added a reference; if you're using information from another source, you should reference that source rather than paraphrasing or quoting without an indication. -- Sine 04:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Some questions for you
But not from me :-) Shiver has some questions that might be better answered by you, since you seem to be going through and adding (seemingly) random furs to the wiki. Not that that's a bad thing by any means, but it might be good if you could talk about how you choose to add and what your motivations are.DuncanDaHusky(talk) 15:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Newspaper Articles
Hi GR. Just writing wondering if you can clarify the way articles on newspaper pieces should look?

Sine has gone and removed the italicization of the title from two entries I put in today: Lions and Tigers and Bears, Oh My‎, March of the Furries. (I'd originally copied the format from an earlier article about a Denver Westword piece: Let's Pretend We're Bunny Rabbits.)

Is Sine's way correct? (It seems to be, I think Sine is using an accepted style, but I thought I'd double-check before spending time going through the list of Media Coverage articles and standardizing them all - there are few in there that italicize the title).

Also, some articles on newspaper/magazine columns have the "(year) events" category whilst others don't. What's the correct thing here? -- Higgs Raccoon 20:56, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I would generally agree with this. The titles of newspaper articles are typically encased in quotes if there is a need to offset them from the text. Given that they are already bolded (being the title of the page) this is probably not necessary. We would italicize the name of the publication.


 * It's tempting to suggest that we should use Category:News by date for this, but it's probably a good idea to keep the two concepts separate. We do have the Timeline of media coverage for non-furry media. I don't think the date categorization really adds much in this case, so it could be removed (they're not really an event). --GreenReaper(talk) 22:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:EmejnOtterFursuit.jpg
The picture Image:EmejnOtterFursuit.jpg needs its copyright status resolved, same as the previous images.

Why was not a usable tag for this image:
 * The way I see it is that is sort of a "fair use" claim; a fursona drawing is a like a "logo" for that furry, so a low-resolution graphic of a fursona drawing is the only way to illustrate what the fursona looks like. Pictures of fursuits are not unique in that way; anyone can take a picture of one.

--Rat 20:08, 18 July 2007 (UTC)