Talk:Don't need anatomy, it's mah style

Speedy Delete

+SD. Term is not a propagated furry/term. The term is too mainstream, if so, and cannot attributed to a single artist fandom, with SciFi/Manga and others involved. Because if used by a few individuals, even furry, claim of furry origin can not established.

Search of all engines indicated a use propagation across all the fandom's lores - Spirou 15:43, 21 May 2011 (EDT)

Oh. I've only ever heard it directed at furries. Equivamp 15:57, 21 May 2011 (EDT)

This is why: This shows what appears to be an anthro artist. this talks about how it's mostly canid artists. this talks about Wolfaboos. I think this article is relevant. Equivamp 16:25, 21 May 2011 (EDT)

this. I could add more, but I'll wait until it's neccesary. Equivamp 16:40, 21 May 2011 (EDT)

I'm not sure how it fits here, but here's an article on similar topic with direct reference to furries: Furries Are Easier To Draw. EvilCat 18:11, 21 May 2011 (EDT)

I didn't say it will never get adde to Wikifur. New created memes, terms or lores don't actually need to be added here because it is furry. some new expressions or terms sometimes buckle that requirement, see Krystal can't enjoy her sandwich, which became a full fledge furry expression in a matter of days. If you had not posted "Don't need anatomy, it's mah style" here, it would have just stayed a short term trend/meme.

Dozens of new terms or expressions get submitted to Wikifur, it doesn't mean all have to be accepted. Its a balanced job to try to determined,... I have seen the terms Sparkledogs and Wolfaboos on different areas of talk and art, so I didn't blink an eye when they were submitted,... "Don't need anatomy, it's mah style" is relegated to deviant as a minor trend, with no indication is geared to furries only, and when discussed the majority indicate "All Artists", not furry alone.

I'm not trying to get your goat, Equivamp, sometimes you have to determine if a article about something is worth adding to Wikifur, that's all.

Changing tag from "Speedy Delete" to "appropriate", as an issuing debate still on progress - Spirou 20:01, 22 May 2011 (EDT)

I'm going to have to agree with this considering a certain DA user pockyandhentai posted this picture in their gallery. Drawing anthro is a crutch which is now deleted. but i've managed to save the original before it was reported due to certain people being called out considering i'm sure most users know how most DA users maturity is, as well as giving construct criticism = trolling Though a good example of this article would be a user that fits this quite well. Blueshinewolf considering there's also a related article about this a few days ago. Tridragon 21:36, 22 May 2011 (EDT)

Won't be able to put up an appropriate response until later, as the external links are blocked at my school, which is currently where I make most of my edits. I'm just typing this so people know I'm still reading. Equivamp 12:26, 23 May 2011 (EDT)

"It's my style" is applied to all dubious art. Professionals are sometimes critical of furry art as well on the same grounds. However, this should probably be mentioned under furry art rather than having an article of its own. --GreenReaper^(talk) 12:30, 23 May 2011 (EDT)

Concur with moving it into the furry art entry. I think having multiple, questionably notable entries like this fragments the site too much. One might observe that there have been many cases where artists intentionally skewed realism and proportion to achieve a desired effect. (Picasso anyone? Dali?) I am not suggesting that Furry artists are necessarily in the same league as the great masters, but it does illustrate the point that some artists DO break convention in order to achieve a stylistic effect, even if others simply do it out of ignorance or inexperience. In any event, I don't think that this one-liner sentiment from a meme deserves its own article. Since it's a charge leveled at furry artists, it would be more appropriate and POV-balanced to mention it in the article on furry art. --CodyDenton 01:25, 24 May 2011 (EDT)

That's actually a good idea, O Lord of the Wiki--and something I probably wouldn't have thought of myself. (D'oh!) While I do feel that this topic should be mentioned on this wiki, it is unimportant to me whether it has its own page and probably better if it doesn't. Agree with the merge. Equivamp 12:09, 24 May 2011 (EDT)

This sentence is not an explanation of a term. It is one of the thought. "New vocabulary" that can't find it on a dictionary may have a negative influence on formal sentence. Alphawolf Kiba 07:49, 25 May 2011 (EDT)