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

If anyone is interested in cleaning up this article and filling in all the references, I'll be happy to provide any references or additional information on request. Contact me through or johnofe at I would do it myself but I don't really know how or have the time. Some of the quotes here are obsolete but are still factual. If you want anything just ask, don't be afraid of asking direct personal questions. ~—The preceding unsigned comment was added by johnofe (talkcontribs) .

Hi JohnOfE, I will be contacting you via the email address you have provided. Equivamp - talk 10:28, 4 June 2014 (EDT)

I have updated the best I can, hopefully it plays well with the rules, etc, if not please do make the necessary changes and/or let me know what I did wrong. I don't know if it's right for me to really hover around here adding to my own page, but I've laid the ground work for you so feel free to build on it.

Again, I'm happy to provide citations when needed. There are many thigns people know are true about me, but cannot find the actual reference. I can be of help here. Keep in mind there is a single PDF document on which holds almoste very reference you could ever need :-) Johnofe (talk) 01:04, 8 June 2014 (EDT)johnofe

Dude, I'm at a loss as to why this article is marked as "no references provided" again because I've put heaps in. Can someone let me know what's missing? Do we really need a reference for every 5th word or what? Let me know and I'll fix. Johnofe (talk) 02:25, 9 June 2014 (EDT)johnofe

If you believe a tag is inappropriate, you're welcome to remove it. It's up to the person placing tags to justify their presence, here or in the edit summary. Perhaps they could use more specific {{fact}} tags. --GreenReaper(talk) 02:32, 9 June 2014 (EDT)

Wikifur article[edit]

User articles are centered around the person described and it's relation with the fandom; trivia data like the Norbert addiction is fine, but the article is not or should, be about it exclusively and it's already covered extensively (with appropriate directing ref links to) in your own personal sites; in short, the May 2014 edit trimmed the excessive non-user data to the minimum required to be concise, yet informative. Your June 2014 "rewrite" just turned the article back into another "outlet" about this obsession, again.

The point is made, don't abuse Wikifur's data display capabilities for your own wishes. Hope this come across clearly. - Spirou (talk) 04:18, 9 June 2014 (EDT)