Talk:Shizimiru Okami

Deletion?
The article needed major work (including rewriting to give it a more neutral tone), but I'm not sure that outright deletion was absolutely necessary. There is, as suggested in the original article, a thread on the subject on the artists_beware LJ community:. and they did something to get suspended from Fur Affinity: .--Higgs Raccoon 19:55, 17 September 2013 (EDT)
 * The way it was written it would have warranted just a wipe and rewrite. The image was posted without permission, and the whole thing was just an an attack/harassment piece from the first word onwards (are the deeds done real, Google leans to yes. Was it the proper way to write an Wikifur article?. No). Major work is an understatement.
 * In short, it doesn't mean that taking the users's name, and doing a google search (like you pointed out), that the article cannot be recreate from the ground up... properly. - Spirou 20:18, 17 September 2013 (EDT)
 * I'd have been inclined to point all this out to the original creator, and given them a few hours to correct the worst excesses of bias in the article (complete rewrite, as you point out) before resorting to the delete button. But, of course, I'm stupidly optimistic. :P --Higgs Raccoon 20:31, 17 September 2013 (EDT)
 * "I'd have been inclined to point all this out to the original creator",... It didn't take a Rocket Scientist to figure out that the original editor had no intention of impartiality when creating the article. No "Shizimiru Okami (born XXXX) is a furry artist who lives in XXXX", "Her Fursona is a XXXX.", "Controversy: This author has done the following deeds...(Ref A_B)", "External links: Shizimiru Okami at Fur Affinity" "Person-stub" "category:Artists"...
 * Nope. Just: "She's a dangerous person to be around, and I warn everyone to stay away from her, and don't believe a word she says, once she gets under your skin she'll play you like a fiddle, and never let go like a rat latched onto your arm. Beware, and be safe.",... Any impartial back-up on this rant?. On reference link as an afterthought on the last edit of the article.
 * There are editors that mean well, but may come up a little bias (no problem, edit the article, point the POV problems on their talk pages, or add a NPOV tag for further discussion), then there's the "scorched-earth" school of editing users.
 * If the article had been salvageable, Higgs, I would have done so without blinking an eye. This was one hell of a hatchet job that was unrecoverable. And I might as well create an article for the user then, and get it over with. - Spirou 20:52, 17 September 2013 (EDT)