User talk:Calbeck

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

Reply on FAASA article[edit]

The sections I have added on FAASA are factual.

Do you have any evidence of that? Likewise, you've written the text as though its a rebuttle. WikiFur contains articles, not discussions over subjects. Finally, please remember to sign your edits on talk pages. --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 09:28, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Please reply on the talk:FAASA page.

Watch the POV[edit]

Thank you for your edits and additions - you've done a great job, and WikiFur really needs more people with experience with pre-Internet furry fandom. You do seem to let POV get mixed up in with facts, unfortunately, and that's why I've made the edits I have. As an example (from furvert), wholesale deletion a statement is not cool - someone obviously felt that was true when the article was written. Stating that there are those that disagree with that statement and believe another statement to be true is acceptable, though. Thanks for the time you've put in so far and I hope you'll continue to contribute to WikiFur!--Duncan da Husky 13:45, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Perverts or Converts?[edit]

I deleted the material because it was factually false. This is not a matter of competing viewpoints, and I do try to minimize my POV impact. There's simply never been a phrase in the fandom like "furry convert". I would have run into it sometime during the previous twelve years, or in my voluminous readings of ancient furry fanzines, if it were. It's always meant the same thing, and has a provable etymological trace back to at least 1987. I would have incorporated the material if there were any factual basis to it. --Calbeck 14 Sep 2005
Well, I would the qualify that as to the best of your knowledge, such a phrase has never existed. I'll be honest, I've never heard of it either. Fortunately, there is a solution here: Almafeta wrote the original article, let's see what his source for the etymology was.--Duncan da Husky 15:46, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Since Duncan asked me: I got the definition of 'furvert' by hanging out in WCotP and other Muck-type areas a few years back; I can't source it like I can a more encylopedic article. I was thinking the edit of was a spamming or flame-bait edit, because it came from an IP for one, and two because wasn't integrated with the rest of the article (f'rex, 71.10 left in that furvert had two meanings, even though his one-sentence addition meant that there were three definitions in the article. That lead me to believe that 71.10's defition of 'furvert' had never been used, except perhaps by him, so I'm inclined to agree with Calbeck.
And the closest to 'furry convert' I've ever heard before is 'fur-curious', which is what one friend of mine with an ill-defined lapine fursona describes himself as. Almafeta 16:20, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I have heard the phrase "Furry Convert" with regards to people converting and moving from one "subfandom" (such as Lion King) into the mainstream furry fandom. The etymology I can give you goes back to, at least with regards to Lion King fans joining into the furry fandom and calling themselves "furry converts" , at least 1995ish. That said, I've never heard the "furvert" combination to describe a furry convert. Redcard 16:33, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Right-o, then. I'll strike the bit about "furry convert" completely and leave the rest as it stands. Sound good?--Duncan da Husky 16:45, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Well, Redcard's statement sounds reasonable for the origin of the phrase, and I admit to not being that salient with the "Lion King" side of the fandom (though I've seen a fair bit of good material out of them). Almafeta's "fur-curious" rings a bell, too. But regarding the situation of the moment, sounds like we're all pretty much agreed that "furvert" means someone who likes "furotica".--Calbeck 14 Sep 2005

Your ideas[edit]

I like your ideas and the way that you think. You're very logical and well thought out. In fact, I'm having a discussion with you right now on I'm curious if there's any idea at having another run at a group with the mentality of burned fur? Redcard 17:15, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)


I really don't have the inclination to deal with this. Please stop making unsubstantiated edits. Source it or don't write it. That said, I'm leaving dealing with you to other admins, because I can see both with the edits you're making and your choice of material that you are a drama explosion waiting to happen. I have more interesting things to do with my day other than fight with you. Simba B 19:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

1) This is Burned Fur we're talking about. Posting the article in the first place was a drama explosion waiting to happen. And just what "drama" am I inducing, by stating confirmable facts?
2) I've already substantiated my edits. Now, if you want me to provide links to all the negative press articles that took place before Burned Fur existed, as well as to every one created since then, for the sole purpose of showing that not one of them referenced Burned Fur as its source for the article, then I can do that, but then again that would be defined as SPAM.
3) The pre-existing article was loaded with material that had no substantiation, such as the long-standing allegation that Burned Fur was in part responsible for attracting bad press by complaining in public forums. I call bias on your part, and I call your claim of "edit wars" false since someone ELSE is re-editing MY work without cause except the unsubstantiated claim of "PoV". --Calbeck 14 August 2007