User talk:Spirou/Archive3

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


I'm wondering if we should leave that up. It's obviously a malicious sling at Jeremy. I'm not a big fan of the Duke, but reading that article over was kinda ridiculous. I suppose how would you feel if someone made a parody version of you?--Kendricks Redtail 02:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I vote we delete it. This isn't ED or Uncyclopedia. Let them host that stuff. Simba B 02:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
OTOH, it might be worth archiving. Simba B 03:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Last word I got about it is to just leave the entry (after locking-up the "redirect" loophole,) alone for the time being,... =/ Spirou 03:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the editing on my page, wiki-fying it and such ^^Lucashoal 04:46, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem, anytime Spirou 05:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

thanks for cleaning up my page, I was getting round to it honest! ;) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Foxy Malone (talkcontribs) .

Anytime,... and Wikifur it's not set on a timer so, you don't have to race to edit an entry. If you can't get to it, other editors will help ^-^
FYI. To sign your comments, just add four "~" at the end (no quotes) Spirou 23:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Dmuth Vandalism

Is wikifur under attack again? - RVDDP2501 23:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Naw, no really,... minor annoyances Spirou 23:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Smokin' Aces

Okay, come on now... where does one get the idea to dress up like a bunny and have sex? I just noticed that they're making this guy out to be a pervert and threw furry in there as well. You wanna take it down? Fine. Take down CSI, ER, Drew Carrey, and all the other furry sex references, or grow up and realize there's nothing we can do about it. Our names are tainted. So get over it.
-Skunklogo.gif(U)(T)(C) 09:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

A) It was just a head, not a full mascot costume and/or fursuit, and, B) if that was your only prerogative for inclusion of this entry on the Wiki (A lonely animal costume head +lawyer transgenderism=Fandom "Sickness">Make entry on Wikifur?,) it's a very tenuous one, at best, reading a wee much into it at worst. Will bring up for discussion on article's talk page Spirou 15:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

  • It's not just a head, the head is what is shown, the rest of the suit is in the scene but shown so very briefly. You can actually see another part of it in the screenshot I've posted. The connection is weird fetishes and obviously furry is one of them. Just like the VF article, just like CSI, just like Sex2k... I figure it should at least get a mention. I'm not reading too much into it.
    -Skunklogo.gif(U)(T)(C) 15:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Still out of commision,...

...Just that it gets really boring being laid out convalescing this long (blargh,)... Spirou 08:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello there!

Hey Spirou. Thanks for cleaning up the FurF entry for me, it's really appreciated. I just wanted to touch base on the clarification you needed regarding a couple of the entries on that page.

The first one was regarding the fund raiser, where I quoted that I had brainstormed having a fund raising section in the FurF forum after I had watched this being attempted on another furry board.

I used to be a moderator on, which is the 'other' board in question. This is where I had watched furs try to help one another by setting up something so members that didn't have sufficient funding could attend a function that was being held.

This event is the FurBQ, which you can find on under events. On numerous occasions staff would delete the requests for help, stating that they would not allow 'charity cases' on the board, hence the deletion of the posts, and a separate thread that was created just for that purpose, to help others out. I watched as members were hurt and disgruntled, and once FurF was up and running, I vowed that would never happen on the board.

If I can help someone out I will, and there are others who would like to as well, so the Bring Spike Home fund raiser was born. The Bring Spike Home fund raiser is to help fellow fur Spike_2K5 who is from South Africa come to Canada. It costs a load of cash for him to come, so members are pooling resources together to help make that a reality for him while he is doing what he can on his end.

I didn't want to elaborate on who he is to respect his privacy, so I just left it at that. If you want any more more clarification or information regarding this, I'd be happy to give you what you require. Unfortunately in order for anyone to view the thread that contains the criteria on this fund raiser, one has to join the forum in order to see it.

I apologize if this has brought up any red flags, as I try to make sure everything is accurate without offending anyone. Feel free to ask away! Again, thanks for being patient as i learn how this editing stuff works. SheWolf

"Hey Spirou. Thanks for cleaning up the FurF entry for me, it's really appreciated." No problem, anytime =) "I just wanted to touch base on the clarification you needed regarding a couple of the entries on that page,"...
The citation request was because it was more to make the paragraph clearer to readers than a request of proof. The rewrite and your explanation here does help on that respect. Sometimes you have to look to an article someone creates, and read it as a third party viewer to make sure what you are trying to say comes clear.
"I didn't want to elaborate on who he is to respect his privacy, so I just left it at that. If you want any more more clarification or information regarding this, I'd be happy to give you what you require. Unfortunately in order for anyone to view the thread that contains the criteria on this fund raiser, one has to join the forum in order to see it." So far, so good,... it will be up to other editors and admins to see if these changes/add-ons are good enough, but we can cross that bridge whwn we come to it. And welcome to Wikifur, by the by Spirou 02:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Person articles

Thank you for creating all those articles about people! I've been at most of them, tweaking the external link format to the usual (there's usually no need to specificy that something at deviantART is a gallery, for example), and futzing with the wording and categories. A couple of things you can include when initially creating articles, to save on subsequent editing: describe what someone is with "as of date" or just "is"; "currently" gets outdated and is vague as it involves going back through the edit history to see when currently was. Birthyear, or any other information in a category, should also be in the article text. -- Sine 04:42, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that (about "currently,") danke =). A couple items, tought,... Since the start of the Wiki, I always seen/wrote aka as follows "X (also known as XX) is...", with the recent addition of a couple editors of the birth-date in it "X (also known as XX; born January 1, 1999) is...". Almost every person/fursona entry has it that way, currently. Which way should it really be and should we add it to The Furry Book of Style? (my personal preference is the for the bracket version, but its up to the rest of the Admins, I realize.)
Ditto with the non-inclusion "gallery" or "profile page" on external links, but it reads okay either way with me (will follow it with new/existing entries.) Same with birth-dates. To help in the future, should we create a dummy user article on the The Furry Book of Style for existing/new editors, with all these examples laid down for reference?. Spirou 05:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I think X, as known as Y, (born date) flows the best, personally. An example person article on the Book of Style is a great idea. What about creating that, then calling out for discussion of standard wording and such on the talk page? -- Sine 05:27, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Alright, but we are going to have to make a couple thousand user article changes, just FYI <=) Will mock-up a user entry page (we will be probably eventually going to need ones for sites, mailing lists, etc,...)
Sorry, do you mean "X, as known as Y, (born date)" or "X, also known as Y, (born date)"? Spirou 06:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


I'm new to wikifur, but I learn fast. I'm the creator of the wolftracks entry you just edited. I'm not totally sure what your refering to for being cleaned up and context. I've been using the only other 2 channel entries I could easily find for a reference point for creating my wolftracks: Bondagefurs and Foxie (neither have been moved to a title indicating IRC) and both have as much or less context than my own entry.
Wolftracks (IRC), and my self entry, WaYa are my first 2 wiki edit's anywhere, so I think I did well for my first time ^^

ahh, this doesn't auto-date/time itself WaYa 9:54AM(EST) 06/03/07

Add four tildes (~) at the end of your comments. It will auto date/sign it Spirou 13:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
ahh, ok. i'll get the hang of this fairly quickly.
looking through the help pages, how do you put a context box like the "WikiFur Help" box, or the "talk archives" box? WaYa 14:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Do you mean templates? Spirou 16:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
wan't a template, I just went to the edit screen in the example to see how it was done. it was
coding. WaYa 22:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Bird people

Hey, Spirou. I brought up Bird people, because I wanted to ask if Bird people as a general concept is appropriate for WikiFur... whether an article, like the one in WP, on this concept would be material for this wiki. The concept appears to be an important one in many ways since Bird people appear in religions, mythologies and modern fiction, like sci fi. Aluminium Falcon 22:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Reading the Wikipedia entry, as a whole, no, because it goes all over the gamut of anthropoformism(sic,)... It would be have to be considered case by case. Many of them are just man with wings,... if that was just the basic criteria of acceptance, Christianity's Angels should be considered for inclusion. If you wish to see if the entry would gather some acceptance for inclusion before making an article about it, make an post about it on the Wikifur Forums Spirou 23:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


When you started Groaties article you included "Not to be confused with the term Groaty". This was the first I've heard of groaty and was wondering if the groaty you were thinking of was a furry term. --EarthFurst 08:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm a bit puzzled now, because after your question, I can't anything on "Groaty" on my notes (o.O) Will take it out until I figure out what the heck I was thinking back them Spirou 20:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)


Hey you fucking asshole, as the creator of Downsy, and the fact that the information there is incorrect and now irrelevant, I'm pretty fucking pissed you decided to take it upon yourself to restore it AND mark the changes as vandalism. I've fucking had it with you changing shit on our page without knowing anything going on, seeing that this is now the THIRD time you've fucked with shit on that page by either adding BLATANTLY incorrect information or changing things without any idea what the hell you're doing. What is your problem and why are you so goddamn incompetent regarding anything related to e621? You can fucking ask people if you don't know instead of making up assumptions and changing things you have no idea about. Yes there is a harsh tone here because this is now the THIRD time you've done this. What the fuck man? - Mellis

We've already talked about this in IRC, but it would probably have helped if an edit summary and/or a named account had been used in the edits mentioned above. Just removing a section is likely to get reverted because we have no idea why you did it. Sometimes mistakes are made, but it doesn't help to insult people when that happens. Ideally information added to articles would be correct, of course - and if there have been problems in the past, it would make sense to check information more thoroughly in the future. That said, I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to assume that a character featured prominently on the front page of a site is either endorsing or in some way associated with that site, given that such characters are mascots on other sites. If that's wrong, the appropriate action is just to correct the specific statements that are incorrect, with an explanation of what you're doing and why. --GreenReaper(talk) 20:28, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Melly. does not indicate that it's you correcting some information of a character you have displayed on your site as most would assumed as being the mascot (no written edits since the entry's article inception have noted "this is not our mascot" notion.) When us, armed with this held belief, view this IP seemingly trying to erase data from your site's history/information in a manner we have witness as just being vandalism before, we normally step in to repair its integrity.
"Hey you fucking asshole, as the creator of Downsy," Yes, I am aware of that information, Melly, and we have had civil exchanges before were you have convey some problems with the data on the article, another reason there was no way to connect with "Melly," hence the revert under the assumption of just it being vandalism.
You have made this point now as Melly,... Why not before, during, or right after any of the edits?, just curious, really Spirou 22:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Downsy II

"Why is it so hard to ask the actual e621 folks instead of making assumptions or making up facts?,"... by the by about that, I never entered the initial data that proclaimed Downsy as being Sidechan/E621's mascot. That "honor" belongs to one Sage Freehaven ( Further involvements with your character just involved clean-up, formating, perceived vandalism removal by (until know) an unknown IP,...

As for asking e621 folks about information concerning the site, I have: Talk:Sidechan. And since I have your attention for a minute, may I ask another question?. How would you describe the inclusion and display of Downsy on both sites if the mascot role is incorrect then?. Not being snarky about it, just curious so we may explain their presence there on the article. Thanks Spirou 00:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Cannabis leaf.gif

Hello Spirou

This is in regards to Image:Cannabis leaf.gif. It has not been tagged with a copyright status. This can be a complicated area, so I can try to help if you need any. The Wikipedia Image use policy may give some background, but it isn't policy here.

To deal with this image, there are a few choices:

  • If you are the copyright holder, release it under a free license, for example:
  • If you are asserting that this image is usable under fair use, add an appropriate fair use tag. A very basic summary is that fair use is used for commentary, criticism and review on the image when no free image could be used instead. Some fair use tags are:
    • Logos: {{logo}}
    • Covers: {{Cover}}
    • Comic panels: {{Comic-panel}}
  • If the image is already under a free license, provide information on the license, and tag the image if you can.
  • If you would like the image to be deleted, ask any administrator

To see a list of current copyright tags available on WikiFur, see Category:Image copyright tags If the copyright status is not resolved, the image may be deleted.

Unless you have a question for me specifically, I'd prefer responses on the page for the image. --Rat 00:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


The image Image:Images.jpg needs a copyright tag, same reasons as previous image. --Rat 02:59, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Changing it to a copyright free image Spirou 04:50, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Overchan V.2 reverts

Hey Spirou, i just want to know why the article got reverted. Mohey Pori is his name, and the is really supposed to be the official url for the furry index and not (there is one for the text index but i forgot it.) --Chomperz 00:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

About the revert: "Mohey Pori is his name." noted and entered as such, all thought we normally don't include aliases/akas on the name link ("!m0hEY/p0RI".) " is really supposed to be the official url for the furry index and not" noted, but I didn't make changes/reverts on the address on the revert, will include right address on next edit. Spirou 10:26, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Reverted to the old address when I hit rollback instead of edit, and missed on the subsequent edit of the article. Will fix. Spirou 10:26, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Thing are better now. I remember the textboard index url but it's not furry related so i don't think it's approprate to put there... also yikes didn't want to cause drama here.. --Chomperz 00:56, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Use of rollback tool

Please don't use the admin rollback tool to dispute edits that are not obviously vandalism, such as an addition of content that you disagree with. A rollback gives no indication of the problem that you had with the previous edit - just that you had a problem with it - and is therefore not a useful tool for working towards a version of the article that everyone is happy with. Instead, please use a regular edit with a proper edit summary.

If you can modify the current version to be satisfactory yourself rather than completely reverting it, do that instead. If reverted, the summary should be sufficient that the other party could potentially correct the error. For example, if you feel sources need to be added to substantiate a claim, this should be explicitly spelt out in the summary. Even if you feel the proposed content has no place in the article (or, alternatively, that removed content should never be removed), we need to know why. :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 10:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, meant to hit edit instead of roll back. Already made the same same mistake yesterday with the Overchan article. My bad Spirou 10:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


Back in December you added MurryFUCK (MUCK) internal link, but such a MUCK article hasn't been created at Wikifur yet. Google only gets 4 matches for MurryFUCK, two at Wikifur and two non-furry board posts using it as slang for FurryMUCK. I'm wondering if you knew anything more about this MUCK (if it exists). --EarthFurst 02:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

It does, or use to (was also known as "The Secret MUCK" or "KobusMUCK.") It's now more for the history of fandom section than anything else. I haven't got to it, or the dozens other articles that I have piled up for upload due to RL, will try to work on it. I have noted the slang version too(MurryFUCK=FurryMUCK,) and maybe we should make a point to open an article on it, or add it to the FurryMUCK article Spirou 02:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

FORMAT (Question - Re:Gallery links on "External links")

When formation a gallery link on this section, we normally format it the following way:

"--External link--

The problem I have seen, though, is that certain users write down as such:

"--External link--

Even though on seems to be used more generally, which format should we follow as the one "by the book"?. Thoughts? Spirou 01:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I think it should be that first one (artist name on website-name.) --EarthFurst 21:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikifur layout and Apple's Safari


As the layout/format of the wiki been changed drastically recently?. I can barely fire up the desktop version of Safari 2 without it quitting several times during a working session.

In the good news department, it renders beautifully on the iPhone's Safari 3 (already made several edits with it.) Just FYI Spirou 01:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Not that I know of. Wikia have been testing some new skins (which I've been trying to tweak), but in theory you'd only see that if you were actually using them. Of course, they could have changed the back-end implementation of this significantly. Still, a website is not generally considered responsible for a browser crash, since the browser should be protected even against bad input. --GreenReaper(talk) 03:49, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, the problem does recreate itself on both my work and home computer, with Safari 2 with OSX 10.4.10 (which is the buggiest OSX release to date,) and only when I edit. Hmm, hopefully this will resolve itself with Safari 3 on Leopard. We had some Safari problems with Wikifur you solved a while back, but this not too bad of a problem Spirou 05:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Exclusion vs. deletion

I saw you deleted Te'Targa - may I ask why? If we are excluding them then deleting history is possible, but the exclusion template should remain in place, otherwise the page can just be recreated, and there is no record of what pages were excluded, or an explanation to someone who is trying to find information about the person. --GreenReaper(talk) 04:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

We had a discussion a while back about exclusion/protection of full vs empty personal articles (where all information had been blanked, then locked,) specially if the exclusion was requested by the user that created it, specially after a very short period of time since its creation.
Back then, on this point, there was a sentiment that protecting this type of entries was a bit defeating the purpose of exclusion/protection. Two articles were being discussed at that time that fit this "blank/excluded" "should we delete them" dilemma, and after one was deleted, I ended up doing the same to the other...
So, now, a bit later, I just saw the same situation with the Te'Targa (created+blanked+request exclusion+locked empty entry,) and since a final consensus was never reached on about this type of article on the first place, I didn't think there would be a problem with its deletion. And, yes, all thought those two articles were not recreated again, I can see your point on the possibility of it being recreated against the User/Wiki's wishes (a la Dingbat.)
In that case, since it was being recreated as fast as it was being delete it, I just recreated, blanked it, and exclude it, as protection for the user's privacy.
Which I can see the use of the Blanking/Exclusion method, but how do we act officially (as it was asked before) with a user that creates its own article, then a short time later, for X reasons, blanks it, and request exclusion?. As I point it out, if somebody is not serious about his presence on Wikifur, why bother keep an entry here on the first place?. Why should we go through the trouble of cleaning it up, formating it, updating it, revert vandalism on it, just to have the users get bored with it, and have blanked/locked?.
Should articles initiate by a user and blanked/excluded within a certain period even be considered for protection, or continuing inclusion on the Wiki?. Just acting on past actions, GreenReaper, and without certain guidelines (or lack off,) is a bit of it and miss sometimes. You have the final say, anyways, so I will adhere to whatever decision is made on this matter =) (Spirou, NOT logged in) 05:30, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
AAAIIIIee!... And that's another thing. It keeps kicking/logging me out (Safari 2, that is.) Spirou 05:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Because exclusion is not about removing their work, it is about preventing anyone from writing about the person. They have decided that they do not wish us to have an article about them. Out of consideration for their wishes, we remove that article and prevent anyone else from writing one by protecting the page. Whether or not they contributed to the article in the first place is relatively immaterial to that decision, which is based on whether or not the argument for having an article outweighs their wish for there not to be one. Indeed, someone could request exclusion without an article ever having been created, although this rarely occurs. --GreenReaper(talk) 05:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Because exclusion is not about removing their work, it is about preventing anyone from writing about the person. No, no, I more aimed at the casual user that creates is own article, and after a short period, decides he doesn't want it on display, and request we protect it. Out of consideration for their wishes, we remove that article and prevent anyone else from writing one by protecting the page. Yes, that was the case with Dingbat's real name article, which I did created, blanked, and excluded it to protect the person's privacy.
No, is more about the Weekend User that fancies an article until he/she deems they had enough of it for X reasons, I.e. the two articles that were discussed about in the past and delete it, and now Te'Targa, created by said user, maintained by us for a while, now excluded on request by the creator of same. Not a berating about the Exclusion system, just people that don't take their own articles creation seriously, that's all Spirou 06:00, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
If they have "had enough of it" then that means they do not want an article, period. That is their option for complete removal of their work. The GFDL submission text is there for a reason. If they don't like how it is but don't want to be excluded then they should rewrite it rather than blank it. --GreenReaper(talk) 06:07, 15 August 2007 (UTC)