User talk:Frizzy

Hi there, Frizzy, and welcome to WikiFur! Thank you for your additions to Cutey Bunny - let me know if you need any help not already provided. :-) -- 14:13, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Blue Forest Characters
Hi there. There's no need to recreate the incorrectly capitalized category Blue Forest Characters. Despite what the Special:Wanted pages seems to think, there is nothing linking to it any longer. (I fixed 'em!) I'm going to nix Blue Forest Characters and pop the Blue Forest template into more articles while I'm at it. -- Sine 18:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Blue Forest Characters has, happily, vanished from Wanted categories. I'm not sure if that's because of it existing again for a little or if re-editing the articles helped or what, but I guess that doesn't matter. The different capitalizations of Blue Forest as a template seem to be redirects. Not sure if that's related either. All very mysterious! -- Sine 21:42, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

To Stub or Not to Stub?
Is there a guideline as to when a short article (which just doesn't have much to say) doesn't need to be tagged as a stub? 1000 bytes, etc.? Wouldn't stop anyone from dropping in to make changes anyway. Just curious. --Frizzy 23:11, 14 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I usually go by the rule of whether I feel there's anything that ought to be added (but that I'm not sure about or don't know or don't feel like putting in right now). -- Siege(talk) 05:02, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


 * The general rule is "if there is probably something that could be added fairly easily by someone who doesn't know much about the topic" (say with a few minutes of google searching) then it is a stub. If not, then it is not a stub, although if you can describe it entirely in a couple of lines, it is probably a strong candidate for merging with another article. --GreenReaper(talk) 08:05, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Categorization?
Thanks for the quick feedback! I was looking through WikiFur's style guide and had another question: Are there any guidelines on category order at the end of articles? I was going through alphabetically, but it might be helpful to define this in the style guide if there's a prefered order to doing this. --Frizzy 19:10, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Technically any order is fine. In practice, for articles about people I've tended to do People and then subcategories of People (note that we only do this category + subcategory thing with people so as to get a full listing in that category), and then their location and year of birth/death. In general I would put the most important or relevant category first, but that's just a personal style. --GreenReaper(talk) 20:45, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Great work!
By the way, in case it hasn't been mentioned elsewhere, thanks for all of the great work you've been doing in cleaning things up around here. Now that we're out of the "insane growth" stage, there's quite a bit of mopping up to do, and the edits you've made are much appreciated!DuncanDaHusky(talk) 12:16, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you! =^_^= --Frizzy 18:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Indeed. Don't think those edits over at List of furry convention resources have gone unnoticed. :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 06:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism and previously reverted nice comment
Sorry about not signing in when I left my other comment earlier (the nice one posted before it was edited by the vandal) DeVandalizer 05:56, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Administrators!
I noticed you were having to do a lot of reversion there. Here's a few extra powers to make things a little easier. Be sure to visit the links in the above page to see how to use them if you've not had sysop access on a wiki before (the bot rollback feature is particularly useful). Remember you can always come onto IRC for more help. Enjoy! :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 16:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Patrolled edits
You can automatically mark edits that you make as patrolled by going into "preferences", and under the "Editing" section, checking the box "Mark edits I make as patrolled". --Rat 18:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

EF 4
I realise my entry for EF4 wasn't any good, but I figured it was better than no entry at all.

And I didn't want Samarindus' tremendous efforts to be forgotten... :)

Template:Timeline of conventions
What's up with that? There seems no reason for it to break. . . --GreenReaper(talk) 07:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Best guess so far: Timeline image creation is broken on the new co-lo. Investigating now! --GreenReaper(talk) 08:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:貓鍋.jpg
Could you check the copyright status of Image:貓鍋.jpg and tag it if you can? I checked the link to Uncyclopedia and did not find a copyright status there either. --Rat 08:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Thoughts on spam from webstores?
I've seen some links that state a specific item is "available at " where the website is an ordinary online store not involved with the creation of said item. When does this constitute unwanted spam? If the item can be Googled fairly easily, should we delete such link postings? Should we be supportive if the store is sufficiently furry or furry-friendly? -- Frizzy 01:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, this depends on the situation, but if the link does provide value to readers I wouldn't remove it. I may even have added it myself. There's a difference between "could be googled fairly easily" and "everyone will know where buy this item, and will do so without being prompted to do so," and it can often be the difference between a sale and a missed opportunity. I would probably consider putting a furry-friendly store above a generic link to Amazon.com, but I wouldn't remove a link to Amazon.com if it made it more likely that people would buy whatever it was. I see people buying more furry stuff as a good thing. *grin* GreenReaper(talk) 01:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the help.
Your edit on the article for Tensai Nezumi is appreciated. I am still fairly new to using WikiFur, and although I've read through the Help page multiple times, I still do make mistakes.

Your assistance, and that of other administrators, helps me to more swifty learn the style book standards that all articles here on WikiFur need to conform to.--Ranshiin 23:42, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Would social groups fall under organizations?
Hi, I'm cleaning up the category and stub hierarchy a bit and wondering if you think social and ideological groups would also fall under organizations? --Frizzy 21:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm. I'm not really sure, but I'd tend towards "no" - or at least "not always". It can be a hard line to draw, though.


 * Wikipedia suggests that organization "pursues collective goals, controls its own performance, and has a boundary separating it from its environment". This tends to apply to groups such as conventions (which are usually "organized" as companies, and if not they still have some sort of formal structure), but it may not apply to people who are, for example, simply interested in a particular topic. Some groups may have no collective goal, just a collective interest. Therefore the furry fandom as a whole is a social group, but is not an organization because it has no formal structure - nobody has the power to say "you're not a member of the furry ffandom". Conversely, WikiFur is, because it has a specific (if relatively wide-ranging) goal, has a structure of rules and guidelines for its contributors to follow, and although it has open membership, there is seen to be a difference between being a contributor or not. --GreenReaper(talk) 21:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback! I added some more templates for some of the stubs that were hard to categorize. Let me know if the heirarchy works for you. --Frizzy 23:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Seems to be fine for now - hopefully the extra stubs will help people concentrate on improving the topics that they're interested in. I'm sure if it becomes necessary to make modifications in the future we can do that. Thanks for your efforts! :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 03:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The files
Regarding the link you added to Banrai, I did not do so myself because it asks for people not to link to it anymore at the end of the post. --GreenReaper(talk) 03:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I missed that! That is indeed the high road to take. --Frizzy 09:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)