Category talk:Species

From WikiFur, the furry encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search

In the interest of giving all species article names the singular form, I just moved/renamed about a half-dozen entries that had plural names. In one case (feline) it wouldn't let me do a move, apparently because both the singular and plural forms already had talk pages (even though one was a redirect to the other), so I had to use the less graceful copy/paste (which unfortunately means the article history is in multiple places). In another case (lapine) there were already a unique articles for both the singular forms, which I renamed to a disambiguation page. If anyone objects to how I handled this, let me know. --mwalimu 14:47, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Well, in that case one option is to delete one of the talk pages, but probably a better one is to untick the "move talk page as well" checkbox. :-)
I've moved it over, as the felines article had more edits. Thanks for taking the initiative to get things organized! --GreenReaper(talk) 01:41, 14 Oct 2005 (UTC)

An issue for a number of articles, but particularly, I think, for species articles (see Human and Dolphin for clear examples) is an overload of information. We don't need to say everything about the subject here, and--I assume!--should be focusing on what is relevant in the context of furry. Surely we don't need paragraphs on the genesis of humans, or on the sensory abilities of dolphins, here on WikiFur? -- Sine 23:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

What sort of species articles are appropriate[edit]

Since the question has been raised (again) on Talk:Darwin's Fox, and I can't find the previous discussion (I think it has been on the talk pages of deleted articles), I am raising it generally here: what sort of articles about species to we think are useful, informative, or otherwise appropriate here on WikiFur? Perhaps more to the point, what sort of articles do we think are not? -- Sine 22:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

The discussion there raises the point that the Darwin's Fox article in its present form is about the real species, i.e. something like you might expect to find on Wikipedia. On Wikifur, some information about the RL species is good to have, but it needs to cover how the species is used and portrayed in furry fandom, such as in art, literature, fursonas, and fursuit characters.
One respondent in that discussion notes that there are articles for Fennec, Arctic Fox and Gray Fox, so why not one for Darwin's Fox. These various species of fox are relatively common, identified as such, in the various furry media, and represented in a manner to distinguish them from other fox species, and that is sufficient reason for them to have their own articles. If there are enough Darwin's Foxes in furry art, literature, fursuits, etc., to justify its own article, then it too should have one. Otherwise it should be adequate to cover it in the general article on Foxes.
Just my opinion. What do others think? --mwalimu 06:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki help[edit]

I'm having doubts about which category in ru-WikiFur I should link to this one via interwiki. We have:

  • Creatures category, with both species and characters (including fursonas).
  • Animal species category, with only real animal species. Fictional species stored in different category.

Or maybe none of these fit?

Also, the same question raises with all animal categories (like Cats, Wolves, Bears...), since they hold both characters and species, unlike separate Feline species and Feline characters of English WikiFur. EvilCat 12:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

The most appropriate equivalent category would be a super-category of animal species and fictional species. This might not exist. The closest of the ones you mentioned is probably the animal species one.
With the individual categories, you might consider linking to both of the English categories at once. I think this will work. --GreenReaper(talk) 15:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
It really does work... Never thought of that. Two "English" links doesn't look all clear, but it's the best solution yet (and certainly better than no link). Thanks. EvilCat 17:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
But wait, how will it affect the bot? EvilCat 19:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
It might get a bit confused but believe I can tell it to accept all of them. --GreenReaper(talk) 19:44, 26 April 2010 (UTC)