WikiFur - User contributions [en]

Talk:Further Confusion/Eyes of the Night

2005-10-01T19:56:25Z

67.188.74.9:

'''This discussion is now archived.''' The result of the discussion was to remove the name of the buyer while preserving relevant information about them (that they were a local appreciator of furry art).

Further discussion of the general privacy topics raised may be found at [[WikiFur talk:Personal information#Definition of "Personal" / Policy on total content]]

== Eyes of the Night ==

The purchaser of ''[http://web.archive.org/web/20041101222805/www.goldenwolfen.com/portfolio/eyesofthenight.htm Eyes of the Night]'' has requested that their name be removed from references about the item, specifically that their name not be connected with the fact that it sold for $10,000. The page about them has also been blanked at their request. They believe this information is used as an excuse for people to pirate their works. They feel that it is a matter of private privacy, and that they should have the right to have such information removed. They also assert that the Further Confusion [http://www.furtherconfusion.org/fc2006/presspolicy.php Media/Press policy] should restrict its inclusion. They have asserted that they will use the means available to them to have this information removed.

'''Note:''' The buyer is ''not'' requesting removal of the information about the price, only the buyer's name.

The source that was used to find this information was [http://www.livejournal.com/users/normanrafferty/415153.html this livejournal post]. If we agree to remove the buyer, I intend to remove this link as well. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 21:47, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:This is my personal feeling: that the information about the auction result was made public, and as such, is public information, even if the person involved "should not" have made this information public. I disagree that they should be able to remove this information without consensus, as they have asserted.

:I also do not feel that the policy governs us, as we were not at Further Confusion, and it's a stretch to consider us the media - we may report facts, but only as part of publishing a website. In that view, everyone's a member of the media. If the policy governed anyone, I think it would be the person who wrote the text, who I do not believe to be a member of the media either.

:Having said the above, I am open to the removal of this information on grounds of respect for personal privacy, if the community believes that this should come under our "removal of personal information" rule. Please make your opinions known below. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 21:47, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::It's too well known within fandom history just to bury it dismisevely, as at the same time, privacy is a primary right to any individual, and well above almost any argument. Verily, a hard balancing act. As many have pointed out, it happened, and it's be written about it so extensively, that it would be a disfavor to this Wiki just blank it out. As for myself, I say aye on the person's request of anonymity regarding his name, no/maybe on the auction info. Here could a rewording of that paragraph:

'''Further Confusion has the largest art show of any convention in the fandom with sales routinely exceeding US$50,000. Indeed, one piece alone (Eyes of the Night by Goldenwolf) went for $10,000 at Further Confusion 2004, the result of a close, fierce bid battle between Flint Otterhallthe and a local furry art philanthropist.''' [[User:63.204.227.202|63.204.227.202]] 23:02, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:::As a matter of opinion, I disagree with the concept that such ''extensive'' privacy (to include the result of an auction that, as far as I know, was open to anyone interested in attending) is an inherent right. I'm aware it's viewed as such in some parts of the world, but this is not the case everywhere, and I do not feel that "privacy above almost any argument" is an appropriate rule to use for a worldwide website - it's too broad. Instead, I believe that the community has to decide what can be held to be private or not, based on the merits of the case. Of course, we are still a young community and I for one do not know exactly what the consensus is about this, and that's why we're here now.

:::Generally speaking I oppose the removal of information because that tends to lessen the value of the wiki, and it makes it easier to "hide" things that are of interest to the community, for the purposes of an individual.

:::If consensus is to remove the name, the wording above looks fine to me (obviously, further edits might be made to improve it beyond that without specifying the name). --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 00:53, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::I am the person in question. All I asked is that my NAME not be associated with the purchase. At no point have I requested that the amount paid be removed. My concerns are with my privacy, with conclusions people reach about me because of such purchases and perceptions of my income, and with security issues ("come steal it HERE!") that have arisen since a stalker has begun harassing me (stalker name withheld due to pending legal action). It is my belief that there is no "right" for anyone here to know the contents of my home, my income, my spending habits, or any other information disclosing personal financial or property information. It is also my belief that the policy under which this site operates, and its stated promise to remove reference to individuals upon request, is not being honored. I have taken this up with senior Wiki administrators who agree with me (I will post relevant portions of the logged chat if need be), however there is still a refusal on the part of local administrators to comply with either the senior Wiki administrator's recommendation or my request. --The Buyer

:::Firstly, thank you for contributing here. I believe the process of debate is the best way to find out the opinion of the community. Over time, decisions on things like this help make future decisions on similar topics easier.

:::The [[WikiFur:Personal information|policy proposal referred to]], currently in trial, has been a [[WikiFur talk:Personal information|contentious topic of debate]] since its inception. We have only had a few cases so far, so they are not entirely clear. Some would prefer that no rights were granted to anyone to remove any information at all - as long as information is truthful, it should be left alone. Others feel it is the right of anyone to decide for themselves that they should not be mentioned at all, including their actions in relation to other topics, overriding the community. As [[User:63.204.227.202|63.204.227.202]] said, it's a balancing act.

:::In response to your assertion that the ''current'' policies are not being applied . . . well, I wrote those, so I'm fairly sure I know what I meant, and what I did not mean. If you feel any particular phrasing is misleading, please feel free to point it out. I inserted the "information on other pages" section specifically regarding this fact - the application here depends on whether or not the information is felt to be under the category of private/personal or not. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 01:12, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::I would like to know what you believe your legal and moral basis is for having a band of strangers with no legal privilege decide how much privacy I am allowed or denied. If you found my credit report or tax returns online, do you believe you or anyone else here has the right to disseminate that information?

:::I believe (from what little I've read of it) there may be specific laws against dissemination of that particular information, which implies that by default, there is not a law against the general dissemination of information. As I've stated on IRC, if you can actually show me some law that actually applies to this situation, I would be bound to remove it. I don't think you can do this, and in any case, I'd far prefer to have it removed as the result of community consensus here. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:12, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::As for not following your own policies... you are creating links and going out of your way to increase the pointers to the dispute. I view this as a personal act of revenge and reprisal by yourself. Even the Wikia community manager believes you are in the wrong. I quote from the chat session:

::::<Angela> GreenReaper: do you think the price could be mentioned without saying who bought it?
::::<Angela> rather than needing to name the buyer?
::::<Angela> It would seem to fit with the policy of locking people's articles to also not include the information about them in other pages.
::::<Angela> Otherwise, there wouldn't be much point in locking them if people could just write it elsewhere.

::The "Angela" in question is Angela Beesley, a vice-president of Wikia Inc. http://www.wikicities.com/wiki/User:Angela#Contact Why are you overriding her take on this? I am seriously beginning to wonder about your motivations here.

:::She did indeed say that - phrased as a suggestion, not as a command. Just ''after'' that, I explained that this applied to personal information, and that I felt our definition of personal information might not include merely associating your name in relation to what I (and others) considered to be public actions. Once I had explained that, she understood why I was taking issue with your request. I can post the entire log, if desired (although part of it is on my work computer, so there'll be a delay while I fetch it, and I'm not going to be at this computer for an hour from now).

:::My motivations are to ensure that the community of this wiki decides what goes on the wiki. When you came onto IRC, and asked for the page about you to be blanked, I agreed with that, as per our policies, and having outlined the alternative options available to you. When you asked for complete removal, I diagreed to do so without consulting the members of WikiFur. You then started an argument with me where you made various assertions about what you would do if this was not done, and that you did not accept that the community had the right to decide. Well, I disagreed with that. The result of any motivation to get the community involved here is as a result of that.

:::To your specific statement about my actions, I have added one link to this page, from the previous discussion about this very topic. I think it is only fair to let the people who had already talked about it be aware of the current situation, as they were the ones who decided to put it back on your page in the first place, for reasons that they explained on the relevant page. I ''could'' have just posted a link on the WikiFur livejournal, but I decided that this was not an appropriate thing to do at this time. I'm not out to damage your reputation, steal your art, or otherwise cause you trouble. I'm just interested in answering the question - <s>what information is considered private by the community?</s> is this information relevant to the article, and if not, should we remove it anyway out of respect to the buyer's privacy? --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 05:04, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I have a hard time understanding why the buyer's name should be censored. He bid on the piece openly, at auction. Furthermore, as has already been noted, discussions of the matter appear on Livejournal, and also on alt.fan.furry, with full names and amounts. Google's group archive is publicly searchable. The information's been available for anyone who's interested for more than 18 months now. IIRC, it was also discussed on several mailing lists soon after the fact. If it were private information that had never been intended for public consumption (e.g., a secret told to a friend, or something that happened in a room party) I could understand quashing it. Why should WikiFur have to censor information that can be easily found elsewhere, though? --{{ UT|Ostrich}} 03:49, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Just to throw my two cents in - in context, I don't think the information on who the bidders were is all that relevant. The statement that one piece went for $10,000, in relation to how much the FC art show brings in regularly, should be enough.

From my reading of it, FurCon's Press policy does not apply to WikiFur; this is an encyclopedia, not a news site. That strikes me as akin to [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:No legal threats|making a legal threat]], to be honest. [[User:CarlFox|Carl Fox]] 04:52, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Obviously, I support retaining the "controversial" information. It's factually correct, verifiable, and already in the public domain. On the general issue, I don't feel that WikiFur should have a policy of censoring information or adopting a revisionist approach to historical events. If "The Buyer" does have the legal rights to _force_ us to remove the information, that's a different matter; however, I hope that the American legal system is more sensible and democratic than this.

To answer your specific questions: 1. The information is definitely relevant to the article. 2. We should not remove it, or any other information, out of "respect" to anyone. We should only remove information that we're not legally entitled to publish - if it's not public domain, inaccurate and derogatory, reveals _confidential_ information, etc. The fact that a known individual, making no attempt to and expressing no request to remain anonymous, made the winning bid on an item in a public auction does not, to me, come into this category.

And, if we _do_ decide in favour of "The Buyer", I don't think ''philanthropist'' is the best word to describe him, considering his behaviour over the past few years and over this incident in particular. :) [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] 07:01, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::And here we have the most powerful argument possible against disclosure of personal private information: people like the above who want to use it to harm others, with a complete lack of respect for others in the so-called "community". He said it himself.

::This site is going to devolve into the "poison pen" site-of-choice for people like the above. So be it.

::I see which way the winds are blowing. The "community" is bound and determined to do what it damned well pleases, harm whom it damned well wants to harm, regardless of anything resembling law OR morality. To hell with the consequences to anyone except their precious selves. The stated intent of inflicting harm and distress just confirms what I had suspected about the users and administrators of this site. This is not a "noble" attempt to "preserve history"; it never was and never will be. It's a mechanism for defamation, stalking, and inflicting distress on others. It will be dealt with as such.

::Pitchforks and torches for all. Mob-think rules. No regard for the impact your actions have on others. This is your "community". None of these people have met me. None of these people know me. But suddenly, I'm the bad guy, just because I don't want a roadmap for burglars and stalkers published here. In this entire discussion, not a single one of you has expressed even the slightest concern over whether the disclosures in question are in any way harmful; it's all about what YOU want, and not one word has been spoken by any of you concerning whether what I want has even the slightest bit of relevance or weight. Understand this: because of incidents like this, I do not want to be associated with any of you, I do not want to talk to any of you, I do not want to be the subject of your lurid speculations, and I do not want to have to waste time keeping an eye on your activities with regard to me. I want OUT.

:::How on earth does repeating information that's available on other publicly viewable sites constitute "disclosure"? --{{ UT|Ostrich}} 09:02, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::::I'm yet to comment on this entry, but my own interpretation of our own rules is that while [[WikiFur:What_WikiFur_is_not#WikiFur_is_not_intended_to_hurt_anyone|WikiFur is not ''intended'' to hurt anyone]], this doesn't mean it ''couldn't'' hurt someone ''accidentally''. That I think is the key point here. The other major thing I'd like to draw to peoples attention is that our own [[WikiFur:Personal_information|proposed policy]] states that a real name is an item that technically can be removed at request even if it is publicly find out able elsewhere. Therefor one possible suggestion is that if possible, we could replace the real name with the person in question's fur-name, online handle or other related pseudonym, that furname article can then be locked as the current realname one is from further details being posted. Such names should provide a somewhat greater level of protection to privacy without violating our policy of providing factual truth. If people bother to search past that well, we can't stop the determined. To the subject I'd like to again point out that while some of us may appear hostile, this is a community and some are bound to feel protective of it and its ideals when challenged by someone who wishes to go against them, however this is a community and therefor not the view of all, myself being an example. Ready as always to except expansion on my ideas. Hope this can be sorted out soon. --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 15:47, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:::I think what we need is a comprehensive and rigorous definition of what constitutes "personal information" and what constitues "public information", and which is to have priority in disputed cases. For example, a person's real name is undeniably "personal information", and when someone chooses to go entirely by an alias within the fandom, revealing their real name is obviously unacceptable. On the other hand, when someone is apparently happy to go by their real name, and when information about them has been published in "official" locations (such as a conference newsletter - or, to take the extreme case of Sibe, in official police reports), it might be arguable that it's become "public information" and is therefore legitimate to include in WikiFur.

Incidentally, I apologise if my comments earlier were rather more forthright than prudence would dictate. I freely admit that my opinion of the person in question is not too high, and his opinion of me is doubtless similar. If I crossed the line between expressing my opinion and a "personal attack", I'm quite happy to withdraw any part of my posting that's considered objectionable. [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] 16:06, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:I think the shot in the last paragraph was uncalled for, IMHO, but I'll leave it to GreenReaper, et.al. to call if something needs to be withdrawn. (I also am of the opinion that "The Buyer" overreacted to it, but that's just me.)

:I'm also thinking this discussion needs to be moved to its own page, so it doesn't overwhelm the talk page for the convention that, to be honest, the event in question is only a historical footnote. [[User:CarlFox|Carl Fox]] 20:29, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

A sort of summary recapitulation:

The accusations that our Man of Mystery (tm) is making are (if I understand correctly) as follows:

1. That Wikifur is revealing information.

:This is completely wrong. As someone else pointed out, there are unlocked posts on LiveJournal giving the same information. Searching Google's alt.fan.furry archives for the name of the painting will yield a thread with the purchaser's legal name and the amount paid. Additionally, discussions took place afterward on a number of mailing lists, including (IIRC) BAF, GayFur, and OhioFur. The information is already public knowledge.

2. That this information would otherwise be private.

:The information is widely available - See #1. Additionally, the purchase took place in a room filled with several hundred people, and the purchaser bid on it in person, without even attempting to use a proxy. It's difficult to understand how there could be any expectation that the purchaser's identity would remain a secret.

3. That this information is helpful to a stalker.

:If the stalker is from the furry community, he'll know about it already from general gossip and from alt.fan.furry. If he's not furry, he's as unlikely to see this article as he is the discussion on AFF. In either event, I'm at a loss to see how knowing what someone paid for a painting would benefit a stalker.

4. That this information sets him up for a potential robbery.

:No offense intended to Goldanthrowolf, but the fact that $10k was paid for the painting at a charity auction doesn't imply a general market resale value anywhere close to that. First, it's a charity auction. Prices are supposed to be inflated at those. Secondly, art values are notoriously market-dependent. Something that would sell high within the furry art market is unlikely to sell for an equivalent value outside of it.

:Much of the value of the painting at this point comes from its history. Consider a Jackson Pollack painting cut from its frame, and tossed in the back of a housepainter's van. Without knowing its history, would the average person consider it worth more than the other used dropcloths? That's a clumsy illustration, but I hope it gets my point across.

:We meet here with the usual double-bind for art thieves: The painting is worth big bucks only to those who know what it is. However, those who know what it is are also going to recognize it, and know it's stolen. This is why art is generally stolen only by those who want to possess it, or by those working on contract for those who want to possess it. Ordinary thieves avoid art - it's just too risky to resell. That leaves only theft by crackheads, who neither research their victims nor plan their crimes in advance. I don't think the idea that we're exposing him to a security risk holds much water.

5. That Wikifur's motives are malicious.

:I think it should be pretty clear that this is incorrect. In any event, I know of no way to conclusively prove motivation, so there's no real point in trying to resolve an argument over this.

6. That Wikifur's actions violate FurtherConfusion's press policy.

:I've read through the thing twice now, and while there's a great deal there pertaining to reporters visiting the con, I don't see any prohibition against people later repeating truthful accounts of things that happened there. Even if such a prohibition existed, it's difficult to see how there could be any expectation that it would be binding against entities (such as WikiFur) who had no representatives at the con, and signed no agreement. Even if FC does believe that such a prohibition exists, and is binding on the general public (not just con attendees) this would mark the first time since 1999 that there's been any effort made to enforce it.

What I'm left to wonder is why is it a problem if WikiFur posts information that others have already made public? --{{ UT|Ostrich}} 21:31, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::I give up. I can see that any possible justification to intrude into my (and eventually others') private lives will be made, and that the potential trouble it causes will be swept aside. Congratulations, furry paparizzi. I have had enough of this, and of you all. I have resigned my position as Art Director at Further Confusion because of this and other endless demonstrations of the inability of this fandom to show even the most basic consideration of others, and will not be creating any more material of any sort for you people. If any of you think that this is carte blanc to do whatever you want with my existing material, think again. It just means that I have nothing to lose by harming people who attempt to harm me.

::Leave me alone. Especially you, Laurence. Especially you.

::And to those of you who are feeling smug right about now... your turn will come. You won't like it when your "friends" turn on you. Do not think for one moment that for some reason they won't treat you the way they have treated me and others who want out. Your turn will come, with no help from me. This is something that you will all eventually learn. Don't expect me or anyone else here to be sympathetic. They'll just be looking for someone new to harass.

:::You say private lives but well, last I checked. Private has [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Private a definition] which is doesn't in anyway match any of the points raised above. --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 23:52, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

=== Vote ===

'''''This vote is now closed. The general consensus was to remove the name of the buyer out of respect to their wishes, while keeping relevant information about the buyer to preserve the usefulness of the article.'''''

I would like to draw this to a close here, one way or another.

Relating to ''this specific article'', should we:

* Leave it as it is, making no attempt to remove the name or hide the person involved
* Mention the person, and give some general information about what they were at the time, but not a name
* Modify to state the price without the name of the person (optionally, without the runner-up)
* Remove the section about the painting entirely
* Something else?

I am recusing myself from this vote; as as the above suggests, I've become too personally involved with this to have an unbiased opinion. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 22:39, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:If having formed an opinion is reason to abstain from voting, Wikifur's going to have some pretty sparsely-attended elections. --{{ UT|Ostrich}} 01:57, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)

::Well, let's just say I would rather have other people's opinions rather than my own on this. I've said plenty about it already. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:24, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)

==== Leave as is, with names ====

Leave the name there. WikiFur is supposed to be a reference work. He bought the painting openly, without making the least effort to hide his identity, and the information is readily available elsewhere anyway. --{{ UT|Ostrich}} 01:50, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)

==== Modify to remove name, leave relevant info about buyer ====

I don't believe real names should be used, if the person doesn't wish it. --[[User:Rat|Rat]] 23:17, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:I agree with this statement. [[User:63.204.227.202|63.204.227.202]] 23:31, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:VOTE - I think this is the closest to my own suggestion. --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 23:46, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)
:I'll vote for this one, too. [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]]

==== Modify to remove mention of persons entirely ====
*They ask it be removed, we have no legitimate or compelling reason to include it, so we remove it. Simple. [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] 23:38, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

==== Remove section about painting ====

==== Something else . . . ====

== Comments After the fact ==

Sorry I missed out on the discussion and vote. RL had kept me busy over the last week. Anyway, ''if'' I had voted, I too would have voted to leave the relavent info, but remove the name of the buyer.

On a related note, I also think that the behavour of "the buyer" was unecessarily rude, aggressive, and abrasive, and only served to make the situation worse. I also feel that his comments about "questioning our motivation" were unecessary and uncalled for. Had he been a little nicer about the whole thing, instead of literally demanding that we remove all mention of his name, I think the situation could have ended with less brused feelings all around. --[[User:Dmuth|Dmuth]] 18:26, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)

::You are not privvy to what went on "behind the scenes". Your assumption that I went straight to the big guns is unwarranted and incorrect, and is an example of the tendency this fandom has of immediate deominzation of anyone who wants out. This fandom functions like a cult: it is based upon fantasies, with (relatively) charismatic individuals as its leaders, and the "heretic" who wants to leave is considered a threat to be attacked at every turn. I do indeed question the motivations of many of these people; given the way I am being treated I have good reason to. There ARE malicious people here. Not all of them, certainly... but enough. More than enough.

::I asked politely. I was refused. I explained this was causing me trouble. I was told that that was my problem. I quoted the policy stated of complete removal. It was ignored. I asked under what legal and moral basis (BOTH are important, but the latter has been completely ignored) "the community" has to make decisions about others' privacy and desire to leave "the community"; no answer was ever forthcoming. I asked a senior Wikia employee (vice president) for help. She agreed with me but nothing was done. What was I supposed to do? This incident is exactly the kind of reason I want out: there is a complete disregard for others in this "community", where politeness fails, where mob-think is the rule of the day, and where nothing short of heavy-handed brute-force approaches can be used to defend against the "your life belongs to us" mindset that is prevalent and is being so clearly demonstrated right here.

::Yes, I tried politeness. I tried to be discrete (which is why you never saw that portion). I was given the proverbial middle finger. So now I'm left with this. I have only two choices left to me: to submit to the mob, or to fight back by whatever means necessary.

::You'll understand when your turn comes.

Talk:Further Confusion

2005-09-30T22:11:39Z

67.188.74.9:

==Yearly details==

I'd like to see some year-by-year details, as was done for [[Eurofurence]] -- you know, guests of honor, locations, attendance figures, notable events, stuff like that. I'm guessing that only a few people have that stuff at hand. Anyone here? --[[User:Tomhowling|Tom Howling]] 01:49, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Eyes of the Night ==

The purchaser of ''[http://web.archive.org/web/20041101222805/www.goldenwolfen.com/portfolio/eyesofthenight.htm Eyes of the Night]'' has requested that their name be removed from references about the item, specifically that their name not be connected with the fact that it sold for $10,000. The page about them has also been blanked at their request. They believe this information is used as an excuse for people to pirate their works. They feel that it is a matter of private privacy, and that they should have the right to have such information removed. They also assert that the Further Confusion [http://www.furtherconfusion.org/fc2006/presspolicy.php Media/Press policy] should restrict its inclusion. They have asserted that they will use the means available to them to have this information removed.

'''Note:''' The buyer is ''not'' requesting removal of the information about the price, only the buyer's name.

The source that was used to find this information was [http://www.livejournal.com/users/normanrafferty/415153.html this livejournal post]. If we agree to remove the buyer, I intend to remove this link as well. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 21:47, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:This is my personal feeling: that the information about the auction result was made public, and as such, is public information, even if the person involved "should not" have made this information public. I disagree that they should be able to remove this information without consensus, as they have asserted.

:I also do not feel that the policy governs us, as we were not at Further Confusion, and it's a stretch to consider us the media - we may report facts, but only as part of publishing a website. In that view, everyone's a member of the media. If the policy governed anyone, I think it would be the person who wrote the text, who I do not believe to be a member of the media either.

:Having said the above, I am open to the removal of this information on grounds of respect for personal privacy, if the community believes that this should come under our "removal of personal information" rule. Please make your opinions known below. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 21:47, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::It's too well known within fandom history just to bury it dismisevely, as at the same time, privacy is a primary right to any individual, and well above almost any argument. Verily, a hard balancing act. As many have pointed out, it happened, and it's be written about it so extensively, that it would be a disfavor to this Wiki just blank it out. As for myself, I say aye on the person's request of anonymity regarding his name, no/maybe on the auction info. Here could a rewording of that paragraph:

'''Further Confusion has the largest art show of any convention in the fandom with sales routinely exceeding US$50,000. Indeed, one piece alone (Eyes of the Night by Goldenwolf) went for $10,000 at Further Confusion 2004, the result of a close, fierce bid battle between Flint Otterhallthe and a local furry art philanthropist.''' [[User:63.204.227.202|63.204.227.202]] 23:02, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:::As a matter of opinion, I disagree with the concept that such ''extensive'' privacy (to include the result of an auction that, as far as I know, was open to anyone interested in attending) is an inherent right. I'm aware it's viewed as such in some parts of the world, but this is not the case everywhere, and I do not feel that "privacy above almost any argument" is an appropriate rule to use for a worldwide website - it's too broad. Instead, I believe that the community has to decide what can be held to be private or not, based on the merits of the case. Of course, we are still a young community and I for one do not know exactly what the consensus is about this, and that's why we're here now.

:::Generally speaking I oppose the removal of information because that tends to lessen the value of the wiki, and it makes it easier to "hide" things that are of interest to the community, for the purposes of an individual.

:::If consensus is to remove the name, the wording above looks fine to me (obviously, further edits might be made to improve it beyond that without specifying the name). --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 00:53, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::I am the person in question. All I asked is that my NAME not be associated with the purchase. At no point have I requested that the amount paid be removed. My concerns are with my privacy, with conclusions people reach about me because of such purchases and perceptions of my income, and with security issues ("come steal it HERE!") that have arisen since a stalker has begun harassing me (stalker name withheld due to pending legal action). It is my belief that there is no "right" for anyone here to know the contents of my home, my income, my spending habits, or any other information disclosing personal financial or property information. It is also my belief that the policy under which this site operates, and its stated promise to remove reference to individuals upon request, is not being honored. I have taken this up with senior Wiki administrators who agree with me (I will post relevant portions of the logged chat if need be), however there is still a refusal on the part of local administrators to comply with either the senior Wiki administrator's recommendation or my request. --The Buyer

:::Firstly, thank you for contributing here. I believe the process of debate is the best way to find out the opinion of the community. Over time, decisions on things like this help make future decisions on similar topics easier.

:::The [[WikiFur:Personal information|policy proposal referred to]], currently in trial, has been a [[WikiFur talk:Personal information|contentious topic of debate]] since its inception. We have only had a few cases so far, so they are not entirely clear. Some would prefer that no rights were granted to anyone to remove any information at all - as long as information is truthful, it should be left alone. Others feel it is the right of anyone to decide for themselves that they should not be mentioned at all, including their actions in relation to other topics, overriding the community. As [[User:63.204.227.202|63.204.227.202]] said, it's a balancing act.

:::In response to your assertion that the ''current'' policies are not being applied . . . well, I wrote those, so I'm fairly sure I know what I meant, and what I did not mean. If you feel any particular phrasing is misleading, please feel free to point it out. I inserted the "information on other pages" section specifically regarding this fact - the application here depends on whether or not the information is felt to be under the category of private/personal or not. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 01:12, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::I would like to know what you believe your legal and moral basis is for having a band of strangers with no legal privilege decide how much privacy I am allowed or denied. If you found my credit report or tax returns online, do you believe you or anyone else here has the right to disseminate that information?

:::I believe (from what little I've read of it) there may be specific laws against dissemination of that particular information, which implies that by default, there is not a law against the general dissemination of information. As I've stated on IRC, if you can actually show me some law that actually applies to this situation, I would be bound to remove it. I don't think you can do this, and in any case, I'd far prefer to have it removed as the result of community consensus here. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:12, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::As for not following your own policies... you are creating links and going out of your way to increase the pointers to the dispute. I view this as a personal act of revenge and reprisal by yourself. Even the Wikia community manager believes you are in the wrong. I quote from the chat session:

::::<Angela> GreenReaper: do you think the price could be mentioned without saying who bought it?
::::<Angela> rather than needing to name the buyer?
::::<Angela> It would seem to fit with the policy of locking people's articles to also not include the information about them in other pages.
::::<Angela> Otherwise, there wouldn't be much point in locking them if people could just write it elsewhere.

::The "Angela" in question is Angela Beesley, a vice-president of Wikia Inc. http://www.wikicities.com/wiki/User:Angela#Contact Why are you overriding her take on this? I am seriously beginning to wonder about your motivations here.

:::She did indeed say that - phrased as a suggestion, not as a command. Just ''after'' that, I explained that this applied to personal information, and that I felt our definition of personal information might not include merely associating your name in relation to what I (and others) considered to be public actions. Once I had explained that, she understood why I was taking issue with your request. I can post the entire log, if desired (although part of it is on my work computer, so there'll be a delay while I fetch it, and I'm not going to be at this computer for an hour from now).

:::My motivations are to ensure that the community of this wiki decides what goes on the wiki. When you came onto IRC, and asked for the page about you to be blanked, I agreed with that, as per our policies, and having outlined the alternative options available to you. When you asked for complete removal, I diagreed to do so without consulting the members of WikiFur. You then started an argument with me where you made various assertions about what you would do if this was not done, and that you did not accept that the community had the right to decide. Well, I disagreed with that. The result of any motivation to get the community involved here is as a result of that.

:::To your specific statement about my actions, I have added one link to this page, from the previous discussion about this very topic. I think it is only fair to let the people who had already talked about it be aware of the current situation, as they were the ones who decided to put it back on your page in the first place, for reasons that they explained on the relevant page. I ''could'' have just posted a link on the WikiFur livejournal, but I decided that this was not an appropriate thing to do at this time. I'm not out to damage your reputation, steal your art, or otherwise cause you trouble. I'm just interested in answering the question - <s>what information is considered private by the community?</s> is this information relevant to the article, and if not, should we remove it anyway out of respect to the buyer's privacy? --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 05:04, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I have a hard time understanding why the buyer's name should be censored. He bid on the piece openly, at auction. Furthermore, as has already been noted, discussions of the matter appear on Livejournal, and also on alt.fan.furry, with full names and amounts. Google's group archive is publicly searchable. The information's been available for anyone who's interested for more than 18 months now. IIRC, it was also discussed on several mailing lists soon after the fact. If it were private information that had never been intended for public consumption (e.g., a secret told to a friend, or something that happened in a room party) I could understand quashing it. Why should WikiFur have to censor information that can be easily found elsewhere, though? --{{ UT|Ostrich}} 03:49, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Just to throw my two cents in - in context, I don't think the information on who the bidders were is all that relevant. The statement that one piece went for $10,000, in relation to how much the FC art show brings in regularly, should be enough.

From my reading of it, FurCon's Press policy does not apply to WikiFur; this is an encyclopedia, not a news site. That strikes me as akin to [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:No legal threats|making a legal threat]], to be honest. [[User:CarlFox|Carl Fox]] 04:52, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Obviously, I support retaining the "controversial" information. It's factually correct, verifiable, and already in the public domain. On the general issue, I don't feel that WikiFur should have a policy of censoring information or adopting a revisionist approach to historical events. If "The Buyer" does have the legal rights to _force_ us to remove the information, that's a different matter; however, I hope that the American legal system is more sensible and democratic than this.

To answer your specific questions: 1. The information is definitely relevant to the article. 2. We should not remove it, or any other information, out of "respect" to anyone. We should only remove information that we're not legally entitled to publish - if it's not public domain, inaccurate and derogatory, reveals _confidential_ information, etc. The fact that a known individual, making no attempt to and expressing no request to remain anonymous, made the winning bid on an item in a public auction does not, to me, come into this category.

And, if we _do_ decide in favour of "The Buyer", I don't think ''philanthropist'' is the best word to describe him, considering his behaviour over the past few years and over this incident in particular. :) [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] 07:01, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::And here we have the most powerful argument possible against disclosure of personal private information: people like the above who want to use it to harm others, with a complete lack of respect for others in the so-called "community". He said it himself.

::This site is going to devolve into the "poison pen" site-of-choice for people like the above. So be it.

::I see which way the winds are blowing. The "community" is bound and determined to do what it damned well pleases, harm whom it damned well wants to harm, regardless of anything resembling law OR morality. To hell with the consequences to anyone except their precious selves. The stated intent of inflicting harm and distress just confirms what I had suspected about the users and administrators of this site. This is not a "noble" attempt to "preserve history"; it never was and never will be. It's a mechanism for defamation, stalking, and inflicting distress on others. It will be dealt with as such.

::Pitchforks and torches for all. Mob-think rules. No regard for the impact your actions have on others. This is your "community". None of these people have met me. None of these people know me. But suddenly, I'm the bad guy, just because I don't want a roadmap for burglars and stalkers published here. In this entire discussion, not a single one of you has expressed even the slightest concern over whether the disclosures in question are in any way harmful; it's all about what YOU want, and not one word has been spoken by any of you concerning whether what I want has even the slightest bit of relevance or weight. Understand this: because of incidents like this, I do not want to be associated with any of you, I do not want to talk to any of you, I do not want to be the subject of your lurid speculations, and I do not want to have to waste time keeping an eye on your activities with regard to me. I want OUT.

:::How on earth does repeating information that's available on other publicly viewable sites constitute "disclosure"? --{{ UT|Ostrich}} 09:02, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::::I'm yet to comment on this entry, but my own interpretation of our own rules is that while [[WikiFur:What_WikiFur_is_not#WikiFur_is_not_intended_to_hurt_anyone|WikiFur is not ''intended'' to hurt anyone]], this doesn't mean it ''couldn't'' hurt someone ''accidentally''. That I think is the key point here. The other major thing I'd like to draw to peoples attention is that our own [[WikiFur:Personal_information|proposed policy]] states that a real name is an item that technically can be removed at request even if it is publicly find out able elsewhere. Therefor one possible suggestion is that if possible, we could replace the real name with the person in question's fur-name, online handle or other related pseudonym, that furname article can then be locked as the current realname one is from further details being posted. Such names should provide a somewhat greater level of protection to privacy without violating our policy of providing factual truth. If people bother to search past that well, we can't stop the determined. To the subject I'd like to again point out that while some of us may appear hostile, this is a community and some are bound to feel protective of it and its ideals when challenged by someone who wishes to go against them, however this is a community and therefor not the view of all, myself being an example. Ready as always to except expansion on my ideas. Hope this can be sorted out soon. --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 15:47, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:::I think what we need is a comprehensive and rigorous definition of what constitutes "personal information" and what constitues "public information", and which is to have priority in disputed cases. For example, a person's real name is undeniably "personal information", and when someone chooses to go entirely by an alias within the fandom, revealing their real name is obviously unacceptable. On the other hand, when someone is apparently happy to go by their real name, and when information about them has been published in "official" locations (such as a conference newsletter - or, to take the extreme case of Sibe, in official police reports), it might be arguable that it's become "public information" and is therefore legitimate to include in WikiFur.

Incidentally, I apologise if my comments earlier were rather more forthright than prudence would dictate. I freely admit that my opinion of the person in question is not too high, and his opinion of me is doubtless similar. If I crossed the line between expressing my opinion and a "personal attack", I'm quite happy to withdraw any part of my posting that's considered objectionable. [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] 16:06, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:I think the shot in the last paragraph was uncalled for, IMHO, but I'll leave it to GreenReaper, et.al. to call if something needs to be withdrawn. (I also am of the opinion that "The Buyer" overreacted to it, but that's just me.)

:I'm also thinking this discussion needs to be moved to its own page, so it doesn't overwhelm the talk page for the convention that, to be honest, the event in question is only a historical footnote. [[User:CarlFox|Carl Fox]] 20:29, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

A sort of summary recapitulation:

The accusations that our Man of Mystery (tm) is making are (if I understand correctly) as follows:

1. That Wikifur is revealing information.

:This is completely wrong. As someone else pointed out, there are unlocked posts on LiveJournal giving the same information. Searching Google's alt.fan.furry archives for the name of the painting will yield a thread with the purchaser's legal name and the amount paid. Additionally, discussions took place afterward on a number of mailing lists, including (IIRC) BAF, GayFur, and OhioFur. The information is already public knowledge.

2. That this information would otherwise be private.

:The information is widely available - See #1. Additionally, the purchase took place in a room filled with several hundred people, and the purchaser bid on it in person, without even attempting to use a proxy. It's difficult to understand how there could be any expectation that the purchaser's identity would remain a secret.

3. That this information is helpful to a stalker.

:If the stalker is from the furry community, he'll know about it already from general gossip and from alt.fan.furry. If he's not furry, he's as unlikely to see this article as he is the discussion on AFF. In either event, I'm at a loss to see how knowing what someone paid for a painting would benefit a stalker.

4. That this information sets him up for a potential robbery.

:No offense intended to Goldanthrowolf, but the fact that $10k was paid for the painting at a charity auction doesn't imply a general market resale value anywhere close to that. First, it's a charity auction. Prices are supposed to be inflated at those. Secondly, art values are notoriously market-dependent. Something that would sell high within the furry art market is unlikely to sell for an equivalent value outside of it.

:Much of the value of the painting at this point comes from its history. Consider a Jackson Pollack painting cut from its frame, and tossed in the back of a housepainter's van. Without knowing its history, would the average person consider it worth more than the other used dropcloths? That's a clumsy illustration, but I hope it gets my point across.

:We meet here with the usual double-bind for art thieves: The painting is worth big bucks only to those who know what it is. However, those who know what it is are also going to recognize it, and know it's stolen. This is why art is generally stolen only by those who want to possess it, or by those working on contract for those who want to possess it. Ordinary thieves avoid art - it's just too risky to resell. That leaves only theft by crackheads, who neither research their victims nor plan their crimes in advance. I don't think the idea that we're exposing him to a security risk holds much water.

5. That Wikifur's motives are malicious.

:I think it should be pretty clear that this is incorrect. In any event, I know of no way to conclusively prove motivation, so there's no real point in trying to resolve an argument over this.

6. That Wikifur's actions violate FurtherConfusion's press policy.

:I've read through the thing twice now, and while there's a great deal there pertaining to reporters visiting the con, I don't see any prohibition against people later repeating truthful accounts of things that happened there. Even if such a prohibition existed, it's difficult to see how there could be any expectation that it would be binding against entities (such as WikiFur) who had no representatives at the con, and signed no agreement. Even if FC does believe that such a prohibition exists, and is binding on the general public (not just con attendees) this would mark the first time since 1999 that there's been any effort made to enforce it.

What I'm left to wonder is why is it a problem if WikiFur posts information that others have already made public? --{{ UT|Ostrich}} 21:31, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::I give up. I can see that any possible justification to intrude into my (and eventually others') private lives will be made, and that the potential trouble it causes will be swept aside. Congratulations, furry paparizzi. I have had enough of this, and of you all. I have resigned my position as Art Director at Further Confusion because of this and other endless demonstrations of the inability of this fandom to show even the most basic consideration of others, and will not be creating any more material of any sort for you people. If any of you think that this is carte blanc to do whatever you want with my existing material, think again. It just means that I have nothing to lose by harming people who attempt to harm me.

::Leave me alone. Especially you, Laurence. Especially you.

::And to those of you who are feeling smug right about now... your turn will come. You won't like it when your "friends" turn on you. Do not think for one moment that for some reason they won't treat you the way they have treated me and others who want out. Your turn will come, with no help from me. This is something that you will all eventually learn. Don't expect me or anyone else here to be sympathetic. They'll just be looking for someone new to harass.

Talk:Further Confusion

2005-09-30T08:13:32Z

67.188.74.9:

Talk:Further Confusion

2005-09-30T07:31:32Z

67.188.74.9:

Talk:Further Confusion

2005-09-30T07:29:29Z

67.188.74.9:

Talk:Further Confusion

2005-09-30T02:33:54Z

67.188.74.9:

Talk:Lance Rund

2005-09-30T02:13:30Z

67.188.74.9:

== FC 2004 Art Auction ==
This section has apparently been removed as it contains "personal financial information". I feel that it should be restored. The amount of Mr Rund's winning bid on the picture in question is a matter of public record - indeed, I was there, I saw it with my own eyes and heard it with my own ears. It's not as if the article mentioned the ''source'' of Mr Rund's money, or anything similar which might reasonably be considered "personal" or "confidential". [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] 10:00, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:I would tend to agree. If it happens in a public place, with everyone's identity obvious, then there is no basis for removing it. Additionally, it is notable as being the singularly largest bid ever in an art auction at a furry convention, so it deserves to be recorded.--[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 12:01, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:I thought this, but decided to leave it for a while because I wrote it. Thanks for the validation. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 13:56, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::In my opinion, an account of the FC 2004 record winning bid ought to be included somewhere in WikiFur (possibly in the entry for FC or Goldenwolf), even if the identity of the winning bidder is not included. --[[User:Mwalimu|mwalimu]] 21:38, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

== Blanking ==

Lance contacted me on IRC just now. He wishes the removal of this information from the entire Wiki. He believes the information is a matter of personal privacy, and that he should have the right to demand its removal, because it is apparently being used as an excuse to pirate his work. He also claims that he is being stalked, though he did not say by whom. I have informed him of our policy, and have blanked his page in accordance with it - in regards to the general availability of that informatinon, he is talking to Wikicities. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 20:58, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:Further discussion on this topic is at [[Talk:Further Confusion]]. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 01:21, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Why are you explicitly pointing to a topic in which the point of contention is personally identifiable information? Why does THIS blanked topic have such an extensive call-attention-to-it flag? Is this an act of reprisal?

Talk:Further Confusion

2005-09-29T23:37:57Z

67.188.74.9:

Talk:Further Confusion

2005-09-29T23:37:25Z

67.188.74.9: /* Eyes of the Night */

User talk:GreenReaper

2005-09-08T00:45:48Z

67.188.74.9: Problem with ArtPlz page

I can't say anything about if I'll be adding things regularly, but I will when I have time/ideas. As for nationstates, its neat to encounter another head of state no? I run The Union of Tinis which is part of the Furry Federation. --[[User:Izixs|Izixs]]

==LylatRPG==
Hi. Thanks for the welcome. ^^; This seems to be a confusing topic in my mind as far as sorting, but what would "StarFox" groups like RPG's belong to? Certainly the one I know about so far does not use a MU*, but rather IRC and has it's own Wiki even. --[[User:Markus|Markus]] 09:48, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Hmm. Not sure myself. Maybe you should make a new category for roleplaying groups, and then categorize that category page to <nowiki>[[Category:Community]]</nowiki>. You make new categories just by doing <nowiki>[[Category:Whatever]]</nowiki> and then clicking on the link to edit it like any other page. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 14:03, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC)

==Welcomes==

Thanks for the welcome! I've really enjoyed participating in WikiFur thus far, and I'm glad my contributions have been useful. I hope to continue to be an active participant in this community effort, and I think it's really going to be a success. ^_^ --[[User:Flynn|Flynn]] 03:34, 10 Aug 2005 (UTC)

----

No problem! Great, great project. I'll be contributing more as time allows and directing others to it as well. The pro-vanity page policy is an excellent idea. --[[User:Osfer|Osfer]]

----

Thanks for the welcome too. I've been having fun with this. I even have my own wiki for my comic Buddies in Big Places, so it was pretty easy to get started here. --[[User:Sethtriggs|Sethtriggs]] 04:25, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

----

Just want to thank you for the friendly welcome and for all the help and advice you've given me. I'll sort it out and it will be very useful in future contributions. --[[User:Ultraviolet|Ultraviolet]]

== Redirect ==

How does one create a redirect? Ie, to redirect "Camp Feral" to Feral? --{{UT|Tafyrn}}

:Just type <nowiki>#REDIRECT [[Feral]]</nowiki> on [[Camp Feral]]. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:49, 14 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Cleanup ==

GreenReaper: thanks for your efforts in cleaning up newly created entries. I've learned a great deal from comparing my original entries to the improved versions! --[[User:Osfer|Osfer]]

:No problem! --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 05:43, 14 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Is there already a 'beginner's guide' page available? If not I'd be happy to start work on it. Berhaps it could be linked to from the main page? --[[User:Osfer|Osfer]]

:::There's the [[Help:Contents|help]] page, which is linked to on the side and on WikiFur Central. It also links to the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents guide on Meta]. If you think you can improve the help page, go right ahead! --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 05:48, 14 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Have you considered instating a 'ranking' system to indicate users who have contributed a great deal? I'm not trolling for rewards, myself, but as a New Mediast I'm rather interested in how you'd prefer to navigate between the offering of a reward for contribution and preventing people from performing useless edits and contributions to gain a higher ranking. Ranking systems are fairly common in forums and seem to manage themselves, there. --[[User:Osfer|Osfer]]

:::There are ways to measure people's contributions, if so desired. You can look at a user's contributions page, which is a link in the toolbox to the left when a user's page or talk page is selected. You can also see what other people have said on a person's user talk pages, or look at the [http://www.wikicities.com/wikistats/EN/TablesWikipediaFURRY.htm#wikipedians user section] of the [[Project:About#Statistics|statistics]] to get a rough idea of where they stand contribution-wise.

:::In the end, though, for the people we really want to attract, contribution is its own reward. That's not to say people can't be ''proud'' of their contributions, of course, but obsessing over it is probably unhealthy. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 06:06, 14 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== NPOV / Vanity Pages ==

You know, if you're aiming for NPOV, you might want to consider instituting a rule about, uh, not making articles about yourself. They tend to be one-sided at best, and blatant advertisments at worst. And the authors tend to react rather badly to other people editing 'their' writeup.

But then again, [http://www.everything2.com/ E2] is not NPOV and is also quite awesome. --[[User:Xax|Xax]] 19:02, 14 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:We're not, exactly. I accept that most articles about users are going to be positive. I encourage that, actually, as it's the negative ones that seem to cause trouble. See [http://www.livejournal.com/community/wikifur/2177.html?thread=6017 this discussion] for more on my views about vanity pages, and less important pages in general. Basically, what's appropriate for Wikipedia may not be appropriate for us. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 19:12, 14 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Oh don't worry, it was just a joke. I wouldn't actually go along with something like that, since I'd be banned pretty quickly, I'm sure. :>

== Blue Forest enties ==

Hi! I just wanted to thank you for putting work into helping out with entries related to Blue Forest. I was plesantly surprised to see these here! I'm in the process of adding and expanding on some of them, now, and I certainly welcome any tweaking that you think needs to be done. -[[User:K.M. Hirosaki|K.M. Hirosaki]] 04:47, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:You're welcome! You obviously have a few loyal fans who cared enough to start them. I'll be watching, but your pages seem pretty good so far. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 04:55, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Is it possible to have both me redirect page "Alex Vance" and my full entry "Osfer" listd under People and Writers, or is this bad form? Considering how many furs alternately use their full name or their handle on-line, I suspect such a construction may be of use to more people.

Also, have you considered disallowing anonymous edits? The extra effort of registering might be a slight deterrent to casual vandals. --[[User:Osfer|Osfer]]

:It can be done, but wither it is or not depends on how much longer the trolls persist in causing trouble and grief in their malicious edits. --[[User:Markus|Markus]] 13:16, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== kekeke goon rush ==

At this point I would just suggest forbidding anon edits and new account creation for a few hours (if you can do that) --[[User:Xax|Xax]] 18:14, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

==OMG whut admin?==
No, I certainly don't mind keeping an eye on the RC for vandalism for the time being. The whole "goon rush" issue is what helped me find out about this wiki :) [[User:MelSkunk|MelSkunk]] 19:21, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Article naming convention proposal ==

When I saw [[Serval]] come up as an article, I knew we were going to have an issue. As I'm sure you're aware, some of the older fur fans have gone by animal names as fan names. I propose that we have a <nowiki>[[Category:Species]]</nowiki> with names of things that are animals, as opposed to characters, appended with Serval (species) or Panther (species) or Fox (species), sort of like how WP is has (film) and such.
What do you think? [[User:MelSkunk|MelSkunk]] 05:14, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:It's a good idea. Go for it! --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 05:31, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== About "admin" status. ==

I feel kind of weird for now noticing this, and even weirder for bringing it up, but I'll throw this out there anyway:

WikiFur:Administrators lists me as an admin, and you've also done it on the community LiveJournal which proves that it wasn't just a misclick or anything like that, but after looking up what I'd be able to do with this status, I notice that... well, none of it's there. :) I confirmed this by looking at the literal special page and notice that, while Osfer's name is on there, mine isn't.

Not harping on you to get '''right on this''' so I can go willy nilly on this here Internet Wikipedia machine, because that would be stupid, but can you double-check to see if you did add me to the actual admin database? Thanks. -- [[User:Verix|Verix]] 06:17, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

: *scratches head* - I certainly ''thought'' I put you in there . . . I was on wireless, though, so maybe it didn't take . I was in a bit of a rush adding new admins at the time, so I didn't check. Sorry! Should work now. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 06:21, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:: And there it is in the log. Thank you for trusting me enough to give me this ability. :) -- [[User:Verix|Verix]] 06:22, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

----

Abuh? Well, that was unexpected! Thanks - I'll try to help out as best I can. --[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 17:18, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:You came recommended - besides, you already ''have'' been helping, this just lets you help more. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 17:28, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

==More stylistic suggestions==

Lord forbid, got another bother:
We're getting so many dang micro articles, I think a stub-expansion template for the front might be a good idea.
I've modified one of the tables to be like that in my Userpage, if you'd like to see what it looks like. I'm just excessivly reluctant to make a template without authorization, and even less wanting to add new things to the front page :) -- [[User:MelSkunk|MelSkunk]] 03:04, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:This isn't Wikipedia - you won't get flamed for making a template you think will be useful, or for editing the main page. Be bold! :-)

:The only suggestion I would make is removing the last entry and the - before it as that pushes it over one line for 1024x786 maximised (I've been trying to keep all the main templates that size). Other than that, it looks good to go. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:07, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::I shall go forth fluffily, then! -- [[User:MelSkunk|MelSkunk]] 03:12, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Languages ==
I had just one question re this wiki: Are there any guidelines for creating furry articles not in English? Say, [[Chakat/ia]] or [[Chakat/ru]] or whatnot? I'm a member of Furrys Pro Interlingua, as well as a general-purpose language geekskunk, and I'm just curious. [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] 13:18, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:The "best" way to do it would be to use something like ru.furry.wikicities.com, edit pages on there, and then use translation tags to link to them, as in Wikipedia. We do not have versions of WikiFur in other langauges at this time. If this is something you'd like to help coordinate (it will need at least one person to maintain each language), let me know what languages you'd like it set up for and I can get things set up with the Wikicities staff.

:If you're not up to doing this at this time, as a ''temporary'' measure, what you suggest might work but only if you add a category to each plage, like <nowiki>[[Category:Spanish articles]]</nowiki>, and maybe put a template in the main page to indicate that there is a translation for it (you could do one template that would work for the whole page. That way we can find them to move them later on! :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 13:38, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)
::Something I recently found out: It's possible to have multiple languages on one project. For example, [http://www.wikicities.com the main Wikicities page] does this. You'd need to [http://www.wikicities.com/wiki/Help:Interlanguage_links contact technical support to turn it on], but it'd allow for pages about the same topic to be written in multiple languages while being all on one server (and all part of one community), and while looking like 'normal' interlanguage links. [[User:164.106.241.168|164.106.241.168]] 17:24, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

==Special bar==
Also, I've created a special bar for the front page [[Template:WikiFur Central/Special|here]]. Go ahead and add it if you think it's a good idea ^^; [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] 08:59, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Seems a perfectly reasonable use of space. Added! --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 13:54, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Furry MUCK Logo ==

Thanks for the welcome. :) I moved the logo at [[User:Markus|Markus]]'s request since he was having trouble with the TOC not liking where it was. It was either a case of the logo staying where it was but being made an image, or moving it to where the <pre>'ed text wouldn't damage the layout. -[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] 14:14, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Aha! I have a third option - move the TOC to the section below. You can use <nowiki>__TOC__</nowiki> to specify TOC positioning (or <nowiki>__NOTOC__</nowiki> to remove it entirely, but we need it here :-). Will see if I can figure out a good way to do that. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 14:34, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Mmm.. true the TOC can be moved but if the logo is really wanted at the top and understandibly it is the convention to have it there, pahapse taking a screencap of the wording and having a nice logo image would be better? I'll provide the image if you wish though of course, I can't edit the article currently. While I'm here, would it be ok for me to mention a few things we are missing? Um.. for one.. a deletion policy! o.O I've seen a few articles that seem to have little to do with anything furry ([[Zline]] for example). We could also do with setting up our own Manual of Style for how a biography page, a species page or term page should be laid out for example. I have er.. a -little- exprience with MediaWiki you could say. ;) I spent a good few weeks teaching myself the system and actually have a wiki of my own I'm just.. lacking the community to get it going currently. x.x Despite e-mail pokes to the people who have signed up to it. [http://nidonocu.technoweyr.co.uk/ewiki/index.php/Main_Page EpicWiki] which is a fictional writing wiki, as you can see I spent ages making it look good and now.. no support. :/ And my first wiki [http://nidonocu.technoweyr.co.uk/wiki/ here] which was my test and learning how to use it. It was going to be for a friend's project but that's on hiatus now. What I'm ''proud'' of though on that wiki is the extensive [http://nidonocu.technoweyr.co.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Help:Contents help system] I was planning after hating the mine field that is MetaWiki's. You can see from the pages I did write that I might know.. a -little- wiki syntax. ;) [http://nidonocu.technoweyr.co.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Help:Allowed_HTML] [http://nidonocu.technoweyr.co.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Help:Exploring_an_article] *squeeks* Oh seems you've already fixed it so.. never mind. o.O Hope you take some of my thoughts onboard though. o.o -[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 14:59, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Policies ==

I agree we need to set up some policies - deletion, featuring and the like. Right now we are trying to be as inclusive as possible becuase there's really no harm in having articles that are only mildly related to furry topics, but it's something we'll probably have to look at going forward. For now, don't be too worried if you see something that doesn't seem to fit with the wiki's purpose - we can always do a cleanup later. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 15:54, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)
::Might I suggest creating a 'dubious' template then to help us flag articles that need writers to find more proof of their 'furryness' and at a later date, give us a handyway of tracking down things to go on deletion lists. ;> The closest wikipedia tag I'd say would be [[Wikipedia:Template:Unencyclopedic]], to us of course, anything not furry related is Unencyclopedic.

:::That is a big "of course". I would be wary about limiting the scope of the wiki in that respect. Topics that are only tangentially furry may still be of interest to WikiFur readers and it might well be that there is stuff that can be said about the topic that relates to the furry fandom, and which would not be accepted in the "right" place. Obviously there are cases where links should be converted into links to Wikipedia and the like, but that is not always the case.

::Likewise, we could do with getting [[Wikipedia:Template:Advert]] for pages which are clearly adverts for furry sites and need turning in to articles. Infact.. I was about to list a few more but realised we could do with importing quite a few of the templates. Would you mind if I did so and made changes where needed? I'll also make some wikifur: namespace pages if needed with info and so on about them and how to use. -[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 16:04, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:::Go ahead - be bold! But also, be somewhat wary that you do not bite newcommers by telling them that their contributions are not wanted. If you can see a way to expand the from (say) a stub about an unrelated technology to an article about how the technology is used in the furry community, with links to articles in more depth over on (say) Wikipedia, then that would be more appropriate.

:::Note that you can theoretically use wikicities templates with this method: <nowiki>{{Wikicities:Advert}}</nowiki>. However, if you have time I would import the template as there have been problems with this - most notably it is case-sensitive!

:::I disagree with the use of the Unencyclpediaic template because I think it imposes strong an opinion on something that ''is'' a matter of opinion - there's been [[Wikipedia:Template_talk:Unencyclopedic|a lot of discussion]] about it. The Advert one sounds fine, because it is a more obvious statement about the quality of an article. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 16:22, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::::Very well, I'll get going and take on what you've said. :) More fun than staring at Recent Changes. o.O I'll send some links your way when I've made a few up. -[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 16:34, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

----

Is there a set policy on deleting a person's entry? I noticed you removed someone's entry upon his request. I figure if there isn't one, it might be a good idea to set one up now and make it fairly publically known. Maybe make a template where it would appear rather standard and lock the entry down so it couldn't be changed....something that says "the person in question has asked us not to be included in this project". [[User:Rama|Rama]] 01:09, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:A good idea. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:21, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Stylebook ==

No problem. Is there a stylebook I need to refer to? I see that there have been style changes to the page and I'd rather save somefur else the work if I can...--[[User:Fferret|Fferret]] 19:23, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:To be honest, there isn't one right now - WikiFur only really took off last saturday, and it's been such a rush that we've been figuring them out as we go along. The best guide right now is to extrapolate from existing pages and from Wikipedia. If you do things so that they look the same as similar pages, at least it's consistent. Of course, if you think you have a better way of doing it, you could change them all. Be bold! :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 19:10, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Person pages vs. Personal pages ==

Since this is going unanswered in the Category talk:People section, I'm going to take this here. :>

I'd like to take initiative to start removing information that's too personal-- such as the likes and dislikes of a person, who they're friends with-- in order to make the people pages sound more informational and less like the person is advertising themselves to other possible friends or love interests. Not saying that these are bad, but inapropriate for something like this wiki, which is supposed to be an online encyclopedia.

Thoughts? --[[User:Verix|Verix]] 19:35, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Answered on [[Category talk:People]]. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 19:46, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Linking to a term in Wikipedia, but not in Wikifur ==

May I ask how one would make a link reference to a term that, while not defined in Wikifur, and not directly furry related, is defined in Wikipedia? --{{UT|Seamora}}

:Certainly. You can refer to Wikipedia like this: <nowiki>[[Wikipedia:Article name|text to display]]</nowiki>. This is often preferable to creating an actual page about it. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 20:42, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== How do I add an article to a category? ==

Hi I wish to add an article to a category but the edit feature only allows me to edit the top portion of the page. I tried * [[name of category]] and that places link in wrong place. I tried <nowiki>[[category:whatever]]</nowiki> and that puts link at bottom of page and not as article. Please I looked all over the help section and found nothing usefull for this problem. --[[User:Lupinelonewolf|Lupinelonewolf]]

: (answered) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 21:09, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== OK I tried that but it puts link in incorrect place ==

I understand what you are saying but I am having difficulty trying to place that link into the section labled "articles" in this Category, rather the link is being placed above in a non related portion of the page

I am trying to place a linkie to Anthrofest which is a con in Canada next yr in August and is not listed yet under conventions. Furry Wiki has good exposure and the hope is that people take notice of the unfamiliar name to many and attend. Every time though that I try to post it it puts the link in the wrong place. I want to put the link Under A and right after Anthrocon in the A category on the conventions page.

So I went to the edit section of that page and I guess that portion of the page is protected or something because I cannot get my link to go where I want it. As for the whole "whatever issue I was following advice I found in greenreapers usertalk and somehow a "furfright" ended up in the F like it should have and thus I was trying to repeat that. I think now I realize that what happened was someone saw what I was doing and I did it incorrectly and so they obliged me and did it themself. I appologize for that but still am confused as to add to that "article" portion of the "conventions" page.

:Ahh, I see. The thing you have to understand is that you do not edit the category page to put an article into the category - you edit the page that you want to put ''into'' the category. In this case, you would edit the [[Anthrofest]] article . . . but that article doesn't exist, so you should click that red link to create it. Try just putting a few words and then <nowiki>[[Category:Conventions]]</nowiki> at the end. You should see a link to Category:Conventions appear at the bottom, and when you save that page, it will appear in [[:Category:Conventions]], as you intended. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 21:58, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

==Keep, Merge, Delete==
Hah!
Man, you make funny even funnier. -- [[User:MelSkunk|MelSkunk]] 00:13, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

==Hi!==
Thanks for the warm welcome GreenReaper. While I only have had a little bit of experience with Wikis in general, I hope that I'll be able to contribute where I can. ^^
Ta! --[[User:Composingliger|Composingliger]] 05:53, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)
:Well, I'm sure you'll learn quickly! Thanks for getting permission for that picture of Mab. :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 05:57, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)
::Hmmm... I just noticed that the templates on the front page have been locked now... Hmmm It's a bit of a catch 22 with Wikis isn't it. On one hand you WANT people to be able to maintain, update and improve on things... On the other, there's always people who just like to ruin and vandalise things. I guess it's probbaly the right thing to do, especially being the main page... But a shame that it has to be done. =/ --[[User:Composingliger|Composingliger]] 07:06, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:::They were locked temporarily due to someone vandalising them. They should be unlocked now (unless it's happened again). --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 19:10, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::And yes, that's OK. Amber said that it's fine to use her art for any of the related articles. --[[User:Composingliger|Composingliger]] 07:10, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== New article ==

Pardon me if this is a really dumb question, but how does one get to the initial edit screen to create a new article if there is no existing "Article to add" link to start from?

:Not a dumb question at all - it's not hugely obvious. One way is to create such a link by putting <nowiki>[[Something]]</nowiki> into an existing article - such a related article. This is usually a good idea because it encourages pages to be linked to related pages. However, if there isn't any page for which this is appropriate, you should either put this link in the [[Sandbox]] and delete it later, or type the URL in manually. If you look at the URL for this page, you should see that it includes the name of the page - you can change the URL to any name and it will go to that page, even if it doesn't exist yet. You can then click edit and start typing! --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 14:17, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== On pre-emptive protection: ==

It wasn't pre-emptive. Yesterday there was perpetual vandalism going on on the front page from YTMND.com, spamming "GNAA™" and editing various other parts of the template where they'd just add something stupid. Just wanted to clarify that. :) --[[User:Verix|Verix]] 14:20, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:OK. :-) Just make sure you unprotect them when they go away again! *grin* --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 14:30, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Regarding pre-emptively protecting things, I'd like to propose that we really ''should'' be protecting certain "high-visibility" pages, such as the main page and the templates for menus and such. If any one of those gets vandalized, it could affect the entire site instead of a single page. Also, I'm not sure that we want random users modifying them without checking with us in the first place, even if their intentions ''are'' good. Thoughts? --[[User:Dmuth|Dmuth]] 19:35, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Subpages for Project/Wikifur Namespace ==

Heya, I'm close to finishing my work with the templates. :) However, I wanted to make the one page I have now ([[Wikifur:Boiler Plate Text]]) become an introduction page (similar to [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Template_messages|this one]] on Wikipedia) and have multiple pages for different template types as [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Subpages|Subpages]]. However, it seems this feature isn't set to allow them in the Project(Wikifur) namespace. Would it be possible for you to turn them on? I don't know how it works with Wikicities but on standalone wiki's, its a setting in LocalSettings.php. Many thanks. :) -[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 14:59, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:I'm not sure what the problem is - I was able to make [[Wikifur:Boiler Plate Text/Test]] just fine (deleted it now). Am I misunderstanding what you were trying to do? If so, please tell me exactly what pages you were trying to make/edit and what error message you got. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 17:26, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::According to [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Subpages]], making a link of <nowiki>[[/All Templates]]</nowiki> on the page you wish to have as the parent should save to be 'parent/All Templates'. However, its actually just gone and made [[:/All_Templates]]. If it was a true subpage, it should have a little breadcrumb link auto inserted, like on this page of my wiki here: http://nidonocu.technoweyr.co.uk/ewiki/index.php/User:Nidonocu/Management_Links
::-[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 18:40, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:::Ahh, right, so it's [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Link#Subpage_feature this] - OK, I'll ask. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 18:59, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::::Thanks --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 19:05, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:::::Should be done. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 19:16, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::::::Yeap! All good! Many thanks! :D --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 19:18, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)\
== Categoreis and subcategories ==

Thank you for the friendly welcome message. The help system seems fairly complete. I find it much more useful to click the "edit" section of more complete entries and just look at the code to figure things out, but I know that doesn't work for some people. I do have a question that may be in there somewhere and I missed it. How are categories and subcategories created? It seems to me that one of the sub-categories within People ought to be "publishers." Otherwise, this seems fun and to be growing nicely. -- Gene

:Categories are created like any page, by making links to them or going to their pages. However, to get the links in the right place, you place the special tag <nowiki>[[Category:YourCategoryName]]</nowiki> into the article that you want to be in the new category (or <nowiki>[[Category:YourCategoryName|Optional String To Sort By]]</nowiki> if you don't want it sorted in the list by the article name). This will create a link at the bottom. If it's red, then you can create the category page by clicking it, editing and saving the resulting page - your article page will then be present on there. If the link is blue, then it already existed, and your article page will be added to it. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 21:00, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Boiler Plate Text ==

It is sooo finished @_@
:'''[[WikiFur:Boiler_Plate_Text]]'''
Please link this where ever possible. I've improved quite a few of the templates too in the process. Made up all their connected category pages and so forth. Only thing that needs doing is the voting pages for [[Template:Ifd]] and [[Template:SpeedyDelete]]. I'll do those in a bit, using Wikipedia as a base to work from.

I have no life, seriously. ;)
:--[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 20:57, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Troll ==

Troll running though right now: [[User:66.140.87.119|66.140.87.119]]

: Thank you, masked stranger! --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 22:15, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:: It's me again (Loiosh). I watch the recent changes page.

:::: Heh. 45 or so pages defaced over 14 minutes, all repaired in a span on 3 minutes. That's some damn nice work, folks! --[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 22:35, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::::: If only I'd remembered to set &bot=1, then it wouldn't have flooded Recent Changes! :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 22:41, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Footnote Links ==

How would one create footnote links to lines in a given poem, if this is possible? --{{UT|Seamora}}

:Do you meen footnotes within the poem? If so, you might want to try using the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Ref ref and note templates], which I have just copied to WikiFur.

==Featured Articles==

Well, we don't have to have a new one every day, but I personally recommend the [[Caitians]] one for "next up". It actually had so many images, I had to leave one of mine out. Plus, M'ress is a notable early furry character. -- [[User:MelSkunk|MelSkunk]] 23:51, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Could do with some links to [[MemoryAlpha:|Memory Alpha]] for the added material, especially since it's a Wikia project too. If it was spaced out a bit more somehow, you could fit more pictures in. Perhaps an external links section?

:As for the Featured Articles, we '''do''' have to have one every day, because otherwise the script will go on and there'll just be an ugly red link. Admittedly you coulc copy the last one, but that would be cheating. ;-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 00:28, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Delete Craziness ==

I'm worried administrators are going a bit crazy with the delete button. I'm seeing alot of Deleted articles on Recent Changes and I think the wiki could do with inforcing the Wikipedia style of deletion. That everything needs to be listed before it can be removed. You can block a vandal right away fair enough but we could end up with possible subjects of writing being discarded just because a badly written stub was made. [[WikiFur:Speedy_Deletion]] should be finished soon, you can see how far I've got right now. I really think it would be wise to tell admins to list pages at least for an hour there before removing them, just to see if anyone chips in with content. Pahapse with some policies akin to [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Deletion_guidelines_for_administrators]] as they generally make good sense. -[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 01:45, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Umm . . . I'm not quite sure you get the point of speedy deletes. [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion|Speedy deletes]] are for bringing articles that deserve to be deleted immediately to the attention of admins. If they already ''have'' their attention and are deleted, then that's perfectly fine.

:If you look at [http://furry.wikicities.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=&page= the delete log], I don't agree with you that people are going crazy. Consider the "content" of the pages that are being deleted - almost all are either plain vandalism, personal attacks, or tests, all of which are valid for speedy deletion - which means deletion on site by admins, whether or not they're listed.

:What you are perhaps thinking of is [[Wikipedia:Votes for Deletion|VfD]], which is is the process for removing articles that (generally speaking) are considered not appropriate for a wiki. And, to be honest, I haven't seen too many of them, mostly because we are far more inclusive than Wikipedia at this time. Some ''have'' been shortened, like [[fur]], because they duplicated Wikipedia information without added value, but other than that . . . --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:37, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)
::Ah.. ok I think I see now. Its very late for me and this wiki has offically cramped by left hand with Ctrl+C/V'ing so I'll be brief. n_x; I did reflect the lack of VfD on the template page so yeah..

::Thanks anyway for dealing with all my questions and comments. Just to say would it be possible if you could at some point soon put up links to [[Wikifur:Boiler Plate Text]] where it might be useful like on Help or Community. I might write up a few 'First Time Here?' or 'First Time Wikiuser?' pages if that would be helpful. Have written my first actual article though, [[NorthernFurs (UK)]]! Woo! ^_^ I will offically stop clicking Recent Changes and close my browser now. ;) Speak to you later. -[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 03:56, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:::It went great on the help page. Thanks for taking the time to do these. I just hope we won't have to use them too much. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 04:11, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Signed up for WikiFur! ==

GreenReaper, seeing as you already knew who I was anyway (judging by your comment to my IP number!), is there a way of reassigning those edits to my username? --[[User:Sslaxx|Sslaxx]]

:I'm afraid there is no inbuilt way to transfer edits - however, I have put a note on the [[User:83.104.34.212|user page for 83.104.34.212]], so that anyone who goes there will be able to see that you were the person who made them. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 16:34, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Search Image ==
Hi again. I've just been wondering about the search image for WikiFur - [[Image:Search_logo.png]]. I think it would be nice if it were possible to drop the Wikicities logo and replace it with something of our own. Is that possible (I've noticed that the image itself was locked) or is this a perminant part of the Wikicities branding and thus unchangeable? --[[User:Composingliger|Composingliger]] 17:41, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Hi! It is indeed possible. If you have a suggested alternative, please upload it and link it on the [[WikiFur:Logo ideas|logo ideas page]], and if I and possibly others think it looks good, I'll add it in. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 17:44, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Well I had been considering just a simple resize of '''[[User:MelSkunk|MelSkunk]]''''s logo - [[Image:Wikifurmel-vs-1.png]] - as an intirim solution, or even '''[[User:Seth C Triggs|Seth C Triggs]]''' new one. Personally I just find the Wikicities logo to be a bit ugly (and slightly confusing over the search) and think anything would be an improvement at the moment. ^^ *Yawn* Anyway ~ 4:30am! Really should go to sleep now. --[[User:Composingliger|Composingliger]] 18:06, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:::I think I'll use Seth's for there, since we've already got Mel's image once but your button would go great as a link button - I've put it on the [[WikiFur:About|about page]]. Thanks! :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 19:26, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Articles of the day ==

How do you choose articles of the day? Will you be starting a vote system (something like [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Translation_of_the_week/Translation_candidates this] or anything like that once Wikifur's engine's running?

(Also, you don't need to move this discussion to my talk page when you answer... I check everyone's talk page that I've left a comment on for a day or two out of habit.) [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] 20:16, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Right now, I'm choosing them by looking at the length and technical quality of the article, its subject matter, and whether or not it's got a good picture to illustrate it. See [[WikiFur:Featured articles]], which will be going up on the next one as a link below the box (didn't want to put it there until it had some entries).

:I fully intend to instigate a "Featured candidate" system closely following the system at Wikipedia at some point, if only because it's a real hassle to have to do this myself every day. ;-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 20:35, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Coders category ==

Think a coders category would be useful? We have at least one with a wiki entry already - [[Shippa]], and [[Toast]], when done, could also fall under that category. -- [[User:Sslaxx|Sslaxx]]

:That's a good idea, although I'd say <nowiki>[[Category:Programmers]]</nowiki> would be better than coders. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 22:19, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Shall it be added, then? [[User:Sslaxx|Sslaxx]]

:::You don't have to ask, do it yourself - [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Be bold|Be bold]]! Just add <nowiki>[[Category:Programmers]]</nowiki> at the bottom of the pages to be in the category, and then click one of the resulting red links and fill in some blurb about what programmers are, and put <nowiki>[[Category:People]]</nowiki> of the bottom of ''that'', and you're done. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 22:28, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Editing etiquette ==

First off...nice site. I will admit that I had trepidations about it at first because I could see how this could become just another place to attack each other, but I'm glad to see that stuff like that is kept firmly under control. Gave me something to do when work was slow yesterday. :)

:Oh, I knew we'd be getting that. As you say, though, these things can be managed. I don't want this site to be torn apart by personal disagreement.

Anyways...the real question I have is this. There's one article in particular that I don't think is very neutral and I would like to do a massive edit on it. I wouldn't necessarily be removing information in there, because a good portion of it is correct, but I would like to reword and rework it and include some other information to counter what's already in there. Is this acceptable or is a total rewrite of an article seen as a bad thing? [[User:Rama|Rama]]

:I would say just do it, and then if someone doesn't like it, they can make their own adjustments. If you are hugely concerned about it, you could write it out on that article's discussion page first, and if nobody disagrees, put it in. Up to you! --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 00:12, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Along that same line, if someone removes information from an article, is it acceptable to put it back in? [[User:Rama|Rama]]

:::Now, that depends. :-) It is appropriate to consider what the information was and why it was removed. If, after that, you still feel the information should be present in the article, then you should put it back in. If appropriate, you might want to consider rephrasing the information in a way that means that it cannot justifiably be removed again, either by increasing the evidence supporting it or by reducing the assertion of the information.

:::That's a bit vague because it depends on the information, so let me give an example - if someone said "[[PersonA]] stole and gave out stuff that wasn't his, and he sucks.", and someone else removed it, then I would change it to say "[[PersonA]] distributed pirated material belonging to [[PersonB]] during the period May 2002 - April 2003, including [[ThingA]] and [[ThingC]], as shown at [http://example.com/ this authoritative site with evidence]. Specific-group-of-people [[Somepeople]] [http://example.com said he sucked] as a result."

:::Note that the rephraising is far harder to argue with because it is specific, and it does not make any judgement. It leaves that up to the reader. It also happens to be more useful! --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 02:40, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== How would I make an image become an html link when clicked on? ==

Hi, I checked out the help here and at nidonocu's help page and I do not see info on how to make an image into an HTML link. Do you know how to do this?

I want the picture to go to a web site. --[[User:Lupinelonewolf|Lupinelonewolf]]

:Hi there! I'm sorry, but we've had to disable externally-linked images due to people using them to link to offsite graphics that weren't theirs. As a side-effect, it is no longer possible to do what you want to do, because you have to link images in the external link style to make a html link out of them (even if they reside on this server).

:You can see how it ''would'' have been done [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Navigational_image here]. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 02:47, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Another question ==

Is Wikifur limited to Wikipedia-style pages, or are other things possible? For example, if I had written up a how-to guide on (say) how to build a ventilation system into a fursuit without being obvious, such as would normally go into Wikibooks, could I put it here? [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] 04:34, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Most certainly! We're not subject to those sorts of content divisions - if you have something of use to the furry community that could benefit from being on a wiki, this is the place to put it. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 04:50, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Movie characters ==

Could I convince you to use <nowiki>[[Category:Movie characters]]</nowiki> instead? Trying to keep all category names plural where appropriate. I'll move the old ones, this is just for new ones. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 04:59, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)

: No problem...it's your baby. :) [[User:Rama|Rama]]

== Personal-article Template ==

Just noticed your new [[Template:Personal-article|Personal-article]] Template. Would you like me to add it to the General section of Templates or Special? And is there anything I should mention about its use? --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 16:55, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Already done those things, but thanks for noticing. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 17:00, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Quick Response ==

Hey GreenReaper. Thanks fur the uber-quick response to fix the babyfur article after it was spammed. I must appreciate all you admins do; I imagine the articles undergo inappropriate changes like that somewhat frequently. [[User:Skippyfox|skippyfox]] 08:25, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:I agree...you and the rest of the admins have been great catching vandalism. I imagine we'll probably see a bit of it today since you have the babyfur article featured. [[User:Rama|Rama]] 03:16, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Thanks! It's a lot easier now we have a lot more eyes watching recent changes for trouble, :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:20, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Administrator ==

Enjoy your new tabs! Try to use them sparingly. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:39, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)
:Squee!!! :D :D :D *cough* Yes sir. :> --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 03:53, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Authors versus Writers: Category confusion? ==

There's been at least one instance of someone mistakenly using <nowiki>[[Category:Authors]]</nowiki> instead of <nowiki>[[Category:Writers]]</nowiki>. Could we please have some kind of redirect for the Authors category? [[User:Sslaxx|Sslaxx]]

:Upon testing, the answer appears to be "no". It redirects the viewer, but doesn't redirect category entries. I've put a note on the discussion page for <nowiki>[[Category:Authors]]</nowiki> asking people not to create it. Hopefully the red link will dissuade people from using it . . . hopefully. Or we can just check now and again. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 14:47, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Statistics ==

I'd like to suggest that the page [http://www.wikicities.com/wikistats/EN/TablesWikipediaFURRY.htm Wikicities Statistics for WikiFur] be linked from somewhere on WikiFur, perhaps from [[Special:Specialpages|Special Pages]]. [[User:Mwalimu|Mwalimu]] 19:39, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:We can't edit the specialpages page, but it's linked (along with other stats links) on the [[WikiFur:About|about page]], in the Statistics section. Perhaps there should be a link to that from the left bar (although there already is a link at the bottom, and on the first word of WikiFur Central). --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 20:31, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Furry Games Category ==

I was wondering: Shouldn't there also be a category for Furry Games as well? Granted, most of the games as adopted by the fandom aren't by-furries-for-furries, but they still count.. and games such as Inherit The Earth do count as being from within the fandom.
:''(judging from the Recent Changes listing, that was from Maus Merryjest. Maus, you can sign your Talk comment by clicking the squiggle button at the top of the editing text box, the second one from the right.)'' As for the question at hand, there is a category for games: <nowiki>[[Category:Games]]</nowiki>. If it's listed on WikiFur, I think it goes without saying it's a furry game :-) The category was only created in the last day or so, so you might have missed it. --[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 12:17, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)
::Note that <nowiki>[[Category:Games]]</nowiki> has two subcategories, <nowiki>[[Category:Roleplaying games]]</nowiki> and <nowiki>[[Category:Video games]]</nowiki>. --[[User:Mwalimu|Mwalimu]] 13:13, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Hi, Maus - welcome to WikiFur! As Duncan and Mwalimu say, there already exist categories for games - generally, if it's included on WikiFur, you can assume it has some level of furry content or interest. If there is a game you want to add that doesn't fit into those categories, you could either add it to Games or make your own subcategory (like [[:Category:Board games]]) and add it to that. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 13:45, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Mark page as policy ==

Heya :) Was wondering if you could review [[WikiFur:Speedy Deletion]] and if its all ok mark it as official site policy? I've noticed a few pages being marked for Speedy Delete when they do actually contain content but its not fur related, so I'm going to make a new Warning type template to stop people doing that and instead place a request for making the article in to something fur related. If you check out [[:Category:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion]] at the moment, all the entries it has (not including the Template pages of course) are articles over which the reason for it being here is debated, not that it is SpD material.

: Done. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 17:59, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Also as a side note, I'd recommend archiving some of your talk page as its displaying the too big edit warning right now. o.O -[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 16:41, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:I'm all for the SpD review. That's the most appropriate template we have right now, but I think it would be good to have something more along the lines of "This isn't furry-related enough." --[[User:71.14.103.214|71.14.103.214]] 17:57, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Yes. There are a few things that have been removed because of that already, although preferably we develop articles to have furry content, if possible. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 17:59, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Two comments ==

First: From your comments re D&D characters on another page: is [[gnoll]] okay? I included it because it was a notable anthropomorphic race, and you occasionally see gnolls on places like [[FurryMUCK]]

:I think there should be some reason for it to be on here rather than for links to it to go to Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Gnoll|gnoll]] article instead. It should at least link to that article, too. Perhaps there are some notable gnoll characters that could be listed here? If not, what would a page here add that a link to Wikipedia would not?

Second: I'm kind of worried about the future of this site, since you're taking such a soft line on vandalism and trolling. Why work towards goals like 1000 articles, 2000 articles, etc., if we're going to make those goals because every day another five people whose only connection to the furry fandom is of accusing it of something or other have made vanity pages about themselves and the vandalism groups they belong to?

:As mentioned elsewhere, I (and I think most other admins) disagree with your definition of "vandalism and trolling", which is probably why I seem to be taking a soft line on it in your eyes. We seem to simply have different ideas of what constitutes it. I restrict vandalism to damage to existing articles, to spamming links, to calling people names and the like. Trolling is more subjective, but I would tend to associate it with more subtle actions that are trying to get a response or "stir up trouble". ''Some'' of this can be from the creation of spurious articles, but, in general, people who spend a long time writing articles about anti-furry groups are not vandals or trolls. They are contributors. I have no problem with people who poke fun at the fandom, as long as they don't get personal about it. They are part of it, and a part of our history.

:Please understand that I would rather integrate people into our community than have them as our enemies. If you've read [http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/WikiFur ED's page on WikiFur], you will see that they expected drama. The fact that they did not get what they expected is a direct result of the fact that we got some of the key people who could have caused it (the ones with more sense) actually involved in editing on WikiFur.

:Part of why people do things that you would consider vandalism and trolling is ''because they get a response''. The '''reason''' they do it is because people go nuts about it. Don't go nuts, and they tend to lose interest in causing trouble, and the ones with any worth might actually stick around and do something useful, as has happened.

:If you want another reason, I'd rather they stayed on their pages than were out causing trouble on those made by other people. Extra pages are cheap, and they're even funny, sometimes. :-)

:Despite possible appearances, I'm not so concerned about page count as I am as making a healthy community here. I would suggest that it's more important to focus on all the articles that people are creating that you agree with than worry about the ones other people are creating that you don't agree with, unless they impinge directly on your own.

Third (yes, third of two comments, it's an afterthought): You <i>really</i> need to start making an archive of old conversations on this page. ;) -- [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] 04:42, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Perhaps so. I've been too busy trying to formulate policy and deal with trouble, though! :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 05:15, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

==Blacksad==
Hi! I noticed on the recent changes page that you deleted the ''[[Blacksad]]'' article as vandalism of some kind. I am not sure of the original content of the page (I didn't see it before it was deleted), but ''Blacksad'' is a French comic book featuring exclusively humanoid animal characters, so I would guess it is of interest to the furry fandom based on its content alone. Would you be opposed to the recreation of this article?
Also, is mentioning Sibe in an article against the rules of the site? That seemed to be your implication in your deletion comment, and I hope you can clarify that for me. Thanks! --[[User:Krishva|Krishva]] 05:32, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Hi there! Blacksad is indeed a french comic book. What had happened was that the creator of the article here had copied the entire text of the Wikipedia article and moved it here, and then added a comment about Sibe. The problem was not that the comment was about Sibe ''per se'', but it was that the objective was purely to make a note about Sibe's activities (which they didn't back up with any kind of evidence). They had not fixed up any of the redlinks that were previously to Wikipedia articles, which indicated to me that they were creating the page to try to make a point rather than make a good article page (the edit line ''I don't see how pointing out Sibe's activities is irrelevant, I thought he was furry'' also suggested that they had an axe to grind).

:I also considered the context - the creator of the article had previously been copying unrelated articles over with no addition of information, and they had also been making edits that could be viewed as "troublesome" - I encourage you to [http://furry.wikicities.com/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=FantasticDrFoo review the list yourself] and make your own decision.

:There is certainly room for an article on the book here, quite possibly based off that article. I certainly didn't think that was a good start for it, though, so I deleted it. If you wish for the article to exist again, it should be easy enough to copy it again. Please make sure it has fewer red links when you do it! :-)

:I should probably change the footer of the front page. It's good for people to know that they ''can'' copy from Wikipedia, but some of them tend to be doing so indiscriminately. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 05:54, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

==AWFR input==
(Great, I finally learn to leave a message in the right place, by screwing up somebody's User Page,...Sorry, Green >.<) GreenReaper, AWFR entry has been rewritten. Honest opinion?,... Spirou 22:38, 28 Aug 2005 (Pacific Time)

:Replied in [[User talk:Spirou|talk]]. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 06:19, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== 1000 Articles ==

Heya :) Sorry about any cock-ups this morning on the front page, I had four hours sleep and got woken up by my PC complaining cause it couldn't get online due to our router crashing and I had forgotten to turn the speakers off. ;) Got it fixed, checked the site and it said ''995'' articles and well.. "''Aii!! Gotta do something for the 1000!!''" so made the little graphic and made that special template which we can use when we want to put an extra picture on the front page like for holidays and such. :) I then sat there with the counter on 999, an image upload, the new template page and the edit to the front page all sitting on ready to save as I didn't want anyone to see it early. And then.. the counter stuck and no one updated for a good hour. @_@ I even tried pushing it over myself with an article on [[Dragon Tails]] but it was clearly lacking a few characters and didn't budge. c_c Finally I fell asleep and got woken up about an hour later by a house mate. "''Wha? Argh..''" *refresh main page* '1000' "''Yay!''" *click-click-click* "''Woo!''" :D *collapses dead asleep again* x.z

Lets prepare a little more next time for 2000. ^^; I'll do some work tonight anyway on a possible new front page, give it a look maybe akin to WP with that nice little category bar and use expanding space where ever I can for size issues. :) --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 17:17, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:It's OK, I was just as annoyed at myself for missing out the link on the featured article to the actual featured article! The reason the counter didn't update is because the main page didn't update, and nor did any of the templates that use it - if you change the main page by a space or something and then preview it, you can see what it'll look like if you safe. Or, you can add &action=purge at the end of the URL for it.

:And yes, we probably should be more prepared for 2000. Right now most of my time has been spent formulating policy, and I still have to write that article about WikiFur . . . it never ends! :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 17:28, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::One day [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Eventualism it might]. But then.. that would be boring. XD --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 17:37, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Two Speedy Deletes ==

I was just checking through the All Pages listing for the [http://furry.wikicities.com/index.php?title=Special%3AAllpages&from=&namespace=4 WikiFur: namespace] and it appears we have two Speedy Delete pages. [[WikiFur:Speedy Deletion]] (my own) and [[WikiFur:Speedy deletion]] created by [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] (the curse of case sensitivity strikes again). What should can be done about the latter one? --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 00:35, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:You can merge the two together and make one redirect to the other. Personally, I'd prefer the name "Speedy deletion", as that goes with all the other [[:Category:Policies and guidelines|policies and guidelines]], and in fact with most of the pages on WikiFur. Maybe it's just striking for you because you've been regularly using too many caps. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 00:40, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Merge and updates complete, I've saved the instructions and the facts regarding empty articles needing deleting from the little d page, however copyright violations aren't exactly SpD material so I've removed that. If we start having many of them, I might make a copyright warning template if required asking people to rewrite it without copyright infringement. Also, all templates, template listing and other links are updated, old page will remain as redirect just in case. --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 14:48, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

==Deleted?==

WHY WAS MY PAGE DELETED? --ashi_moto

:Because people thought it should be. See [[Talk:Ashi_Moto]]. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 00:15, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)
:: I think all of their pages should be deleted. If I get a bunch of my friends to agree with me, then do I have permission to delete their pages, too? --ashi_moto
::: I will join this noble campaign. --NotoriousRAE
:::: I knew I could count on you. --ashi_moto
:::::Blanking other people's pages like that is against policy, not to mention an offense which could result in a ban if it persists. The page in question was blanked specifically because the general consensus agreed about the matter and it's content was considered "inappropriate and offensive" presumably by multiple people. --[[User:Markus|Markus]] 08:15, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)
:::::: "Inappropriate and offensive" is subjective. Like I said, would I have permission to delete all of their pages if I managed to get five other people in here who agreed that all of their pages were offensive? Because that's basically what happened. --ashi_moto
:::::::If they were five ''admins'' and nobody disagreed with you, maybe. If you don't like it, don't write stupid pages in the main namespace. This isn't ED. :-) If you really must, use your User page for non-factual stuff. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 13:44, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Mock Up complete! ^_^ ==

Hey :) Phoning in to say I've completed my redesign. You can find the new pages at [[WikiFur:WikiFur Central Version 2]] and [[WikiFur:WikiFur Central Version 2 (Simple)]]. Following the instruction to have a 800x600 nice version. I found that while my new layout does 'work' on 800x600, that is it doesn't force horizontal scrollbars. It does look ugly as sin and hard to read, so I've provided a Simple design as well, much like Wikipedia's table free main page. The two pages will share templates so it won't be double work to update them. The new version features moving about of content, more links to useful information, extra sections to give a home for information and announcements about the wiki, though placed at the bottom to not detract from the purpose of wiki to read and write information. There are a few more Notes on [[WikiFur talk:WikiFur Central Version 2|the talk page]]. I look forward to your comments and thoughts. :) --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 01:38, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)

==Titles with lower cases==

Let me see if I read it right. Wikifur entries ---must--- always start with an uppercase letter (I.e nothinkat->Nothinkat,) but, if an entry is known to start with an lower case letter (I.e. any of Usenets alt. groups,) I must enter the article with an upper case (I.e Alt.fan.furry,) but inser the caveat paragraph "The title of this article is incorrect due to technical limitations. The correct title is alt.fan.furry." before the opening paragraph of the article. --[[User:Spirou|Spirou]] [[User:63.204.227.202|63.204.227.202]] 20:08, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Yes. The correct method is to use this template at the top: <nowiki>{{wrongtitle|title=the correct title}}</nowiki> and it will insert the correct text. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 20:40, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== WikiFur:Help ==

Please don't delete this. It may not have any redirects, but it ''is'' the help link in the "you're making a new page" text. :-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:01, 31 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Ok.. could you put a note on the talk page in case I forget or anyone else tries deleting it. o.O BTW, I've responded to your comments on [[WikiFur_talk:WikiFur_Central_Version_2#Comments]] with some queries, awaiting your reply. --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 03:07, 31 Aug 2005 (UTC)

== Recently popular pages ==

Is there a way to display the most [[Special:Popularpages|popular pages]] using only the most recent data for a specified time period (such as the "show last" options on the [[Special:Watchlist|My watchlist]])? [[User:Mwalimu|Mwalimu]] 23:47, 31 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Alas, there seems not to be. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 01:09, 1 Sep 2005 (UTC)

== Where do they come from? ==

I'm wondering if it would be ok and within wikicity policy if we were to place a tracker of sorts on the front page. The only reason is cause I'm kind of curious about which pages on the net some of our trolls are coming from and where we are being talked about. ;) Aware there might be a few issues regarding this though. o.o; --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 02:46, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:Actually, we already have that - the [http://furry.wikicities.com/webalizer/ Webalizer stats] include [http://furry.wikicities.com/webalizer/usage_200508.html#TOPREFS referrer stats], which I've used on several occasions. They're actually better than a tracker on the front page, as sites often deep-link to particular pages (most of those at the top of the popular pages were linked from elsewhere). --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:34, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::<nowiki>*returns from reading and grins*</nowiki> You need an award of some sort for the amusing panic you caused PA and the retorts on a [[Ashi_Moto|certain someone's]] LiveJournal. ^_^ --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 04:20, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC)

==Um, Hi....==

:''Moved from User: page''

Depends on where they were posted, and if I still had the chars in their 'original form'. I actually wrote those close to a year ago XD.

I *did* remove the references, and as far as I know, only one Public Site has the non-edited copy. The others are all 'Safe', at least with regards to copyright.

I'm a little curious as to where you saw the stories in question.. Yes, I know the Author doesn't like this sort of thing, but I myself only found out his personal opinion... what, Shortly before Fur Affinity went down? A year ago, I had no idea, and I was just starting to write. --[[User:TwoTailedFox|TwoTailedFox]] 19:07, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:''Responded privately''. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 20:22, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC)

== Regarding recent link deletion in Sibe ==

Had a slight tussle over another attempt to remove the link to Sibe's criminal record earlier, I think everything I've replied with is correct policy. Conversation can be seen at [[User talk:68.46.244.231]] and my talk page. --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 02:43, 6 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:I agree. Considering the trouble they've apparently had tracking Sibe down, it's quite probable that the information that the user mentioned isn't current anyway. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 04:00, 6 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:(more details available on the pages noted)

==[[:Template:Wikipedia]]==
With your permission, I'd like to use a verison of this template at [http://ia.wikipedia.org/ the Interlingua wikipedia], for articles that are translated. (I know the GFDL means you don't have to ask about anything anymore, but I still like to show people common curtosy by asking first...) [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] 15:19, 7 Sep 2005 (UTC)

:I'm fine with that. I think we copied ours from Wikicities, anyway. ;-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 19:49, 7 Sep 2005 (UTC)

::Thank you! :) [[User:Almafeta|Almafeta]] 20:37, 7 Sep 2005 (UTC)

== Problem with ArtPlz page ==

You might want to have a look at the ArtPlz page. It rather blatantly violates the "neutral stance" guidelines.