Talk:Marko the Rat

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

The timeline makes no sense; this article states that Marko lived in Quarantine in 2000, but the Quarantine article states that the commune existed 1996-1997. Seems to me like one of the two would have to be edited or amended in some way. (Did Marko live there after the original household disbanded or something?) Also, just guessing from the names listed in the Quarantine article, should there be a redirect from Marko Laine to Marko the Rat? --quoting_mungo 11:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

That was a very stupid mistake on my part. The timeline is confusing because so much overlaps and I must have suffered a momentary brain failure. Of course I meant I was in Quarantine during the time it existed in 1996-1997. There was only ever one Quarantine, even though there was talk of forming a Quarantine II (QuarantIIne?) some years later when some of the original inhabitants got together again. Thank you for pointing that out. That glaring error in the timeline has been corrected.
I see, happens to the best of us. Thanks for clearing that up! --quoting_mungo 08:43, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Whoops my mistake about the slenderous comments undo, I misread it and didn't see the 'not' before the "promoting it was all yiffy" - plus I saw the 'boncing on the lap' comment and assumed the worst and that it might have been one of the random vandalisms. That's my bad. -- Groo 09:37, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Reading over the paragraph again, I'm starting to think that the wording of the paragraph could be meant as sarcastic... I mean that last sentence and the wording of it makes me cringe, especially with the use of the word "loves to engage". I might be over thinking it, but it doesn't seem right, despite it's seemingly innocent context. --

Groo 10:04, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I agree that the paragraph doesn't seem right. The choice of words definitely seems off, and the whole loving to engage with children and having them bounce in his lap part seems like an attempt to imply pedophilic activity. Additionally, the same IP that added that paragraph already added false information to this page that has already been reverted.[1] --V. CA (talk) 08:05, 30 May 2017 (EDT)