User talk:Supuhstar

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)

Spam filter exception[edit]

I'm linking to my survey's results page, and want "<!--[ -->Results" to "[ Results]" on UFS2011 Supuhstar * § 15:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

That link doesn't seem to work, though. (And why not just link to the actual site?) --GreenReaper(talk) 15:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Some suggestions for your Poll[edit]

First off, Christianity is not a single religion. Also, you should involve "Agnostic theist" and "Agnostic athiest"--they're two different things--and also "ignosticism". IMHO. Equivamp 01:34, 14 June 2011 (EDT)

Thanks for the ideas. I think you know I recognize all the denominations of Christianity, but in fact they all praise the same Jesus Christ for the same reasons but in different ways, so Christianity is, in fact, one religion. Also, it's my understanding that Agnosticism is when a person does not know or does not want to know whether there is a God, and does not discount or credit the existence of one, which does not belong in the same descriptor as "theist" or "atheist". Supuhstar * § 03:24, 14 June 2011 (EDT)
Might I refer you to Wikipedia:Agnostic theism and Wikipedia:Agnostic atheism. Also, if you think Protestanism is the same as Catholocism you are sadly misinformed. Equivamp 03:32, 14 June 2011 (EDT)
Agnostic Theism and Agnostic Atheism will be choices in the next version. Thank you. Also, they are not the same thing, but they are under the same religion. They both praise the same deity and both work for the same goal, the only difference is their methods. Supuhstar * § 03:34, 14 June 2011 (EDT)
So is the Islamic religion Christianity too, since they worship the same God, just with "different methods"? Equivamp 03:41, 14 June 2011 (EDT)
Allah is not Jesus Christ, so they do not worship the same deity, but merely a similar one. Please calm down. I'm going to sleep, now, as it is 0344 where I am. Please try to not do anything terribly inconvenient to my articles... Supuhstar * § 03:44, 14 June 2011 (EDT)
I am not attacking you, nor have I once defaced any of "your" articles. I find such allegations horribly insulting. While I admit I do find you ignorant of this, I am at the height of calm, and I'm trying to refrain from insulting you. I myself am not strictly Christian, but that is what I have been raised under so I understand I can come off as biased, but it is simply my intention for WikiFur to be as accurate as possible, especially where things like religion and NPOV are concerned. How I have managed to come off as attacking you is beyond me, as I am simply pointing out a fact. Simply because I disagree with you doesn't make me your enemy. This is what I thought was a friendly debate. Equivamp 03:55, 14 June 2011 (EDT)
I'm sorry for last night's accusations; I was much too tired to be thinking properly. I think you must know that I, myself, am very much Christian. Raised Presbyterian, but recently finding my own way to see the religion. Having been the Sysop of a couple wikis, I often see people making rapid edits to articles like you do as wanting them to reflect their personal views, thinking that whoever wrote them doesn't know what they're talking about, and then you messaged me on my talk page, insulting my knowledge of my own religion. If you want this to be a friendly debate, please refrain from insulting my education and assuming I don't know about something. And on the matter of "my" articles: Yes, these are MY articles! I started them, wrote all the information in them (aside from the edit fixes people have done) and I am the creator of their subject matter! They are as much my articles as Supuhstar. Putting up articles about something I made onto WikiFur was a huge leap of trust on my part, and I find people editing them in ways that misinterpret my intentions to be insulting. Perhaps before assuming that I don't know about what I wrote, you might post a message on this, my talk page, and ask me what I meant, so that we may collaboratively make the article better. Again, I'm sorry for what I said last night, and hope there aren't any hard feelings. Supuhstar * § 13:23, 14 June 2011 (EDT)

Assuming you don't know something is not an insult to your intelligence--you can't help what you don't know. My general belief when editing a wiki is to assume that no one knows anything. Also, I must repeat: You do not own any of the articles on WikiFur except User:Supuhstar. Supuhstar is not your article, rather, the article about you. To show what I mean: If you were to commit, say, consistent art theft, and this was added to Supuhstar with reliable references, it would stay. Any time you or anyone else were to remove, such edits will only be reverted. Wikis are community projects; no one person owns the content. Equivamp 13:37, 14 June 2011 (EDT)

Yes, but I can legally remove any information about me that I don't want on a website. That's my legal right. Supuhstar * § 13:44, 14 June 2011 (EDT)
While you can remove things like real name, address, et cetera without reprimand, things like criminal records have been kept in the past, despite the subject's wishes. This policy also prohibits legal action being taken. Either way, this deviates from my point. Not all who celebrate the messiah celebrate the same Christ: Mormanism's view on Jesus of Nazareth is vastly different than the Catholic messiah. Equivamp 14:22, 14 June 2011 (EDT)
But they're still Christians. And that page doesn't say I CAN'T take legal action, it just encourages that I pursue alternatives Supuhstar * § 16:37, 16 June 2011 (EDT)
But they're still different religions. Either way, I have offered a compromise to the page in hopes to settle this. Equivamp 16:39, 16 June 2011 (EDT)
I saw it. I like it. I'm sorry for all my aggression, and I hope you don't look lowly upon me. I hope we can work together in the future. Supuhstar * § 16:40, 16 June 2011 (EDT)
No worries. Equivamp 16:48, 16 June 2011 (EDT)