Talk:Xydexx's Exploring and Modern Ruins Page

Relevance?

I'm not really seeing the relevance of the topic to this website. If there were an organized group of furs who were interested in a particular topic we might cover them, in the same way that we cover Radiofurs (IRC-Anthrochat) or Furrs Fur Christ. But this is a personal website oriented towards a personal, non-furry interest, with content largely by one person.

Is this information good to have? Sure, some of it, in the context of the interests and activities of Xydexx and his friends. But it doesn't need its own article, unless it's over here. --GreenReaper^(talk) 20:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

It is of just as much relevance as Inflatables.yiff, which is also a personal website oriented toward a personal, non-furry interest. As one can see, inflatables.yiff is listed as a furry art archive, but the amount of furry content there is almost entirely non-existent. (A survey of the message board, files section, and photos combined puts furry content at less than 1%.) The sole criteria for its inclusion appears to be that it is run by a furry, and furries use it, thus it is relevant. By this standard of inclusion, Xydexx's Exploring and Modern Ruins Page is just as relevant, as it is run and used by furries as well.

IMHO, inflates.yiff would be better suited to a site like Inflatopedia or something, but I'm not an Admin so I don't really know what the standards for inclusion on WikiFur are these days. Perhaps you could clarify whether WikiFur is devoted to furry fandom and anthropomorphic animals, or whether it's just "things furries like or find interesting," because lately I've been getting the impression it's okay to include things which have no relevance to furry fandom or anthropomorphic animals. Please correct me if I am wrong in this assumption. — Xydexx 22:40, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I dunno, it sounds more like you're disrupting the wiki to try to make a point. Your buildings are not shaped like animals; conversely, a large proportion of the inflatables pictured on that site are (if you want fuzzy animals, see Plush.yiff). And yes - if it's just "things furries like and find or find interesting", that can be enough. As WikiFur:About clearly states, and has since the site started: If it's related in any way to furry community or culture, chances are it's worth mentioning on WikiFur.

You kinda missed the point about "personal" sites: it's about the source of content. Inflatables.yiff is not "personal" any more than WikiFur is - it has an entire community of people that contribute content to it. Your page is like a gallery of your personal work, and so like any other personal gallery it belongs on the page about you. That doesn't mean we don't want to hear about it, but we also don't want to give it more notability within the fandom than any other site featuring personal content. You don't see me making an article about my Flickr sets; it's unlikely that such a page would be deemed suitable even if they were on a separate website, and much better than they are. --GreenReaper^(talk) 01:24, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I dunno, wouldn't say I'm disrupting the wiki to make a point, but rather attempting to abide by the wiki's somewhat contradictory and mercurial standards to the best of my ability. Besides, if disrupting the wiki to make a point were really such a big deal to you, I'd think you wouldn't be letting people use it as a platform to import arguments that have nothing to do with furry fandom onto it. So I'm not sure what to make of the double-standard. —Xydexx 02:01, 4 September 2009 (UTC)