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


Hi, could you provide more reference about the subject, specially any cross-referenced with/within the furry fandom or it's subcultures. Also, any correlation of it and Skinners (Purple Pussy's foody fandom and Woolies do not count). Any help with back-up data would be appreciated - Spirou 06:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Data removal[edit]

Please do not remove valid information on established articles (Furry), thanks - Spirou 06:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Look again. I didn't remove anything, just changed it to alphabetical order. Supuhstar * § 14:36, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
I concur that nothing was removed. But I do wonder if the one external link should be in a separate 'External Links' section since the rest are links to other articles on Wikifur. --mwalimu 15:20, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't mean to sound rude, but since that was not my doing, it's not my problem. Supuhstar * § 16:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
I see. Link was moved up on the "See also" section. Fixed - Spirou 19:17, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't see what's wrong with this page[edit]

If I am correct, a Smoothie is to the Furry World as a Furry is to the Real World If that's true, then the article Furry should also go. I don't think that's going to happen. Supuhstar * § 16:31, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

If I am correct, a Smoothie is to the Furry World as a Furry is to the Real World". That is your own personal opinion; "Because" or "if" is not a rational or reason to start an article about a non-common furry term.
It's not an established furry term used by a sizable amount of people in the fandom, part of furry lore, or a recent term that instantly becomes know enough to become part of fandom history (Krystal can't enjoy her sandwich).
As a final note, the term does not really belong on the Furry "see also" section. If anywhere in would fall in Human, if at all - Spirou 19:04, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
This page shouldn't be here. I mean, how many people actually use this term? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .
  • Sigh* now it is a opinion piece ("What if,"....). "Opinion" articles are fine if they were memorable/part of furry lore. As it stands, you could add it to your user's page, but not as standalone Wikifur article - Spirou 01:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I've got to vote to delete this thing. You can't just make up phrases and pretend like they make sense or that they're in common usage. You can if you put it in a work of fiction you've created, but I don't know. This just seems so silly. Immelmann 23:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Politically correct title[edit]

Now, there should be a single, agreed-upon term for these. <poll> What would you call a furry that wants to be human? smoothie smoothy reverse-furry anti-furry fleshy pinkie pinky the shaved other (please write below) </poll> Supuhstar * § 20:25, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Again, user page, Wikifur's LJ, or Wikifur's forums, not as a "If they were,..." article - Spirou 01:18, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Furries that want to be human[edit]

Your reasons for moving this article to my userpage are unjust.

  1. It's not an opinion, it can't be. If these exist in the Furry World, how can that be an opinion? It's like saying Narwhals are an opinion. Yes, they are rarely seen, but they are also very real. And having a physical thing be an opinion just doesn't make sense.
  2. I don't know the WikiFur rules by heart, but I do know most wiki rules, and I do not think that a huge edit like that to someone else's userpage without their consent is justifiable. (P.S., if you think I don't know what I'm talking about, Bear in mind that I am the top contributor, a founder, head administrator, and a representative of Simpedia. [see my userpage and stats for proof])

Can you justify these? Supuhstar * § 03:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

An opinion piece ("What if", "If they", "If they were") is not a a reason for Wikifur article. That is you personal (one) opinion about a possibility. An article about any subject on Wikifur is (normally) about common-furry terms/people and/or organizations, or anything related to the fandom's furry lore (with certain exceptions [see: Krystal can't enjoy her sandwich]).
"If these exist in the Furry World, how can that be an opinion?". "If",... Do you have examples, references, correlated data, drawings, discussions concerning the subject?. If yes, and its usage or discussion is quite common in the fandom, there would be no problem, article away. If not, non-common terms and concepts may be put on hold (deletion or be moved to the user's page) until such time it's a valid, widely used term deserving of an article on Wikifur.
The article in question is your own piece of thought, and it's not to be scoff at, make fun, or censored. People have done similar articles in the past, and the majority of the time its moved to the creator's user page for further discussion, or, as stated before, until such time or event it is noteworthy to be made into an article, that's all.
As for the move. If an article and/or portions thereof do not seem to be apt to be an article (or portions off), it's generally move to the user's page for safeguarding (to be edited by the user only, and Sysops occasionally).
Is not about credentials (I'm just a Sysop on this Wiki), it's what constitute an article to begin with, and a non-common term article (Smoothie) which then became an opinion piece ("What is Furries wished/wanted to be human?,...) an article its not. I'm not infallible, and I can be overruled by other editors, Sysops or Wikifur's founder, but as an editor, I need/have to decide if certain articles meet Wikifur's standards. I did so in this case, and asked for reference and explained why it seem to be a problem.
There's no belligerence here, just how and why this decision came to be. Further discussions about the subject are more than welcome, Supuhstar - Spirou 03:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I defy you to find a single "What if", "If they", or "If they were" in the article you deleted! Supuhstar * § 21:03, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
A) Metaphor B) Data moved, not deleted - Spirou 01:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Okay, citing a wikipedia article doesn't really answer that challenge... If you cannot find any instances of the reason you moved the article, It must then be moved back. Supuhstar * § 09:42, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
(P.S. Okay, I don't mean to sound harsh, overbearing, or like I'm speaking out-of-turn, but if you don't come up with a truly legitimate reason to remove this article from the wiki (I know it's on my page, but that's not really the wiki), then I will have to move it back. Supuhstar * § 20:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
A) Such term (Smoothie) does not exist at the present time as a common furry term used on the furry fandom, and as such, it would not warrant it's own article. B) Changing it to "Furries that want to be human" still doesn't make it a valid article, specially under your reasoning If I am correct, a Smoothie is to the Furry World as a Furry is to the Real World. As stated before, "because of X" is not a good reason for an article. You will not be the first person after 11.000 articles that tries to wedge something in Wikifur because "it must me so/it should be so/it sounds cool/I thought of a new term/we four of us thought of this furry concept, furry that would like to be human, etc,"... - Spirou 02:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Having given you over 24 hours to consider this, I take your silence as having forfeit this debait. I will now move the article back to its own page. Supuhstar * § 01:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
... and C) Because we don't respond to something/subject/question within a time frame (Like there was something to respond to), doesn't mean that you "won" and have the right to put your "article" back in. It's not a contest, you are not the only subject on this 11.000+ article Wiki. Please abide by the most elementary rules of this Wiki and common personal interaction with editors and Sysops.
"I take your silence as having forfeit",... I mean seriously,... - Spirou 02:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Article reinstating[edit]

As the point of "why should or shouldn't be an article" seem to be cascading into an edit war, the initial article and talk page have been reverted to it's original state (plus standard Wikifying edits of same).

Appropriate and Reference tags. As expressed before, this Sysop thought article's non-appropriateness as a Wikifur article still stands. As so, the "Appr" tab will be added back in to give editors the chance to comment on the validity or merits of it, until such time a consensus is reach pro or con about same. This is a normal procedure followed on Wikifur, along with the "Reference" tags.

Said tags indicate the helpful add-on of links to articles/data/sites to reinforce the validity of the claims before the tag insertion. Normally, Appropriate and Reference tags are not removed unless the article has enough merit to stand on its own as a full fledge Wikifur article.

Further discussions regarding this article may stay on its talk page - Spirou 05:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Article update #1 (December 20, 2009)[edit]

Updating the entry's appropriateness status. Keep or delete?. Vote delete (forced/non-common term/subject) - Spirou 22:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

This shouldn't be here. It's a term made up by a single comic that has not gained currency. --GreenReaper(talk) 02:13, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

In Russian WikiFur[edit]

You might be interested that Reverse furry article was created in Russian WikiFur, but with several differences:

  1. Defined as an ironic or humorous term describing something similar to furry, but reversed in some way.
  2. With a list of examples of usage (with links).
  3. With a list of furry characters who exhibit interest in human culture or desire to become human.

EvilCat 05:23, 22 November 2010 (UTC)