Talk:Rakir

I have given this article the "appropriate?" tag as it is not WikiFur policy to include articles about species which are not widely known and used throughout the fandom (like chakats or cruxes). On Fur Affinity, there are only two images of "rakir"s, both connected to their creator.--Higgs Raccoon 05:42, 28 December 2013 (EST)


 * removed unnecessary tag, you have not looked in other places it seems, there are more, and this page is to help explain to artists what we commission.
 * am i just to supposed to not have a wikifur until it's popular?
 * made this about ten minutes ago, sorry if there aren't many images yet
 * -ZakdaRak 5:48, 28 Decemeber 2013


 * hey zak i added a few details that were in your book, since you gave me a freebie i thought it was only fair lol
 * also... i myself have no idea what a crux or chakat are, doesnt mean im flagging their whole pages for removal :/ -Mark


 * am i just to supposed to not have a wikifur until it's popular? Yes, that's pretty much how it works. New species have to have become noteworthy by being widespread throughout the fandom before a WikiFur article on them can be justified.--Higgs Raccoon 07:09, 28 December 2013 (EST)


 * Well Higgs... all i can say is give it time, you can't just shut it out the second it pops up because you haven't heard of it, ya know? Apparently it was a little unwise to make the wikifur FIRST, but it had to happen eventually. Thought i'd get it out of the way. Of all the species on here, unknown, and with one line of text in their wikifur, the fact that mine was picked off seems unfair. I use this, and others have already used this as well, for commissions and such, it serves as a wikifur should, and will do so even more so in the future. This i promise you. Rest assured. you're doing your job and i admire that. :)


 * Thanks Mark, and don't worry about Higgs, I don't really blame him, he has a point. I'm not popular YET, however considering all the work and time and heart and soul i put into just the PAGE, i can guarantee i will be. by the end of this year i will have a twitter, e621 pool, tumblr, and steam group set up for daily prizes, facts, giveaways and stuff for rakir and their supporters ETC.


 * It was the fact that i had the page up for ten minutes and he flagged it that got me
 * (Btw mark i never asked how the book went, my cover is half done, and will be published soon, how was it? tell me on steam = "bigzackw" - 7:10, 28 December 2013

Why
"am i just to supposed to not have a wikifur (article for my species) until it's popular?". Correct. Are you allow ed to to have your species listed in Wikifur?. Absolutely, if you create your personal article, where all the data about the species would be transferred to its own section.

"you have not looked in other places it seems, there are more". Yes, yes there are. And when an editor notice them in the future, depending on the notability of the species in furry lore, it will either be left as a standalone article, merged with the author's page until such time it's deemed to stand on it's own, or temporarily deleted until the creator's page is written, and then merged.

"It was the fact that i had the page up for ten minutes and he flagged it that got me". No. You (you) were not flagged. The editor in question was just following normal Wikia procedure in relation to this subject, not waiting in ambush to pounce and delete. Hope all this information explains the reason why there was an issue in progress.

FYI: Adding  ~  at the end of your comment/post will auto generate your own signature for it. - Spirou 17:37, 28 December 2013 (EST)

Conclusion
I'll give you the fact that i'm not as well known as Sergals or what have you, so i removed the category "fictional species" for now... but until you give me a valid reason other than making this a popularity contest, i have as much right as any other to have a page.


 * "I'll give you the fact that i'm not as well known as Sergals". Correct and good example of a notable species that merits a standalone article, more so, since it achieved fast, wide spread recognition probably due to the Internet, as compared to, say, Bambioids, which came to be popularized during the early years of furry fandom via fanzines, BBSes, and word of mouth.


 * "but until you give me a valid reason" (Reason given and presented above) "i have as much right as any other to have a page". Wrong conclusion. No, let me rephrase that. Anybody can add almost any entry to a Wiki... but "can" is an ability, not a right.


 * Anybody can a start a new species article on this Wiki, but, unless there's minimum notability, no, you don't have the right to demand that it stays up, but the author can create an entry about himself/herself, and have the right to write (almost and per most Wikia rules) anything about their species on their page.


 * It's not about "popularity contests" or playing favorites, but more of fandom historical recognition. So don't "demand". This is an open source project, not any contributor's personal page and/or website. - Spirou 22:31, 28 December 2013 (EST)


 * somehow i knew i would get hunted down by tryhard admins
 * a wiki is meant to give knowledge to those who need to know something about something, the only reason a page should be deleted is in the event of a duplicate. to blatantly remove a page without any reasoning besides "never heard of it" is rediculous. in fact, its truly counterproductive. when people need to look this up, where do they go? apparently wikifur only has room for a few more pages, because there truly is no legitimate reason to remove this. This community has severely dissappointed me, and when the next guy comes to write/help write this wikia, i hope you've learned by then what a wiki is. if not, vote for a change of name, because wikifur doesnt fit.
 * thanks a lot guys


 * "somehow i knew i would get hunted down by try hard admins". *Sigh*.... Okay, let me spell it out for you one. more. time.:
 * Anybody can write about any species they own/thought of/created, as an Wikifur entry.
 * But unless notable enough due to (X) reasons (now explained three times), species articles are normally merged with its creator's page, subject to an article split if it becomes (furry) mainstream (see Sergals).
 * If a creator's page is not present, the species article is temporarily removed until created, then merged together, not permanently deleted.
 * All available options to have this species on Wikifur have been presented, so, please do refrain from creating faux drama. Many, many other creators have posted/created dozens and dozens of non-furry propagated species articles, which have been merged into their article entries, available to peruse via the search feature, without any fuss.
 * Tl;dr: Help create a Zakdarak article, then merge Rakir data under a Characters section. - Spirou 03:07, 29 December 2013 (EST)

Data merge/save
The Rakir's species data has been moved to Bigzackw's user page until he/she, or any other editor, creates the Zakdarak article. At that time, this temporary merged info will be moved over into it. - Spirou 03:21, 29 December 2013 (EST)

Fine. I was unfamiliar with not being able to make a "species" wiki for my "species". it should be that simple. But, since it isn't for reasons i still find slightly unjustified, (if anyone could make a species on here i understand it would lead to hundreds of spammed OC's) i suppose i should request the bigzackw article be removed, as well as this one, and i'll move it all to Zakdarak. don't worry about losing the text or code or anything, i have it saved to my computer. "Are you allow ed to to have your species listed in Wikifur?. Absolutely, if you create your personal article, where all the data about the species would be transferred to its own section." It was that that made me think removing the fictional species tag would be enough... guess everything i write HAS to be under my user article...?