User talk:Skippyfox

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

Welcome to Wikifur. And I must say, that's a heck of a way to make an introduction.  :) Do you know anyone with appropriate art that would add it to the babyfur page? If so, that would make it front-page material (the four parts of that being content, length, internal/external links, and a picture). Almafeta 19:07, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Indeed welcome, nice job so far I see. :) You are heading towards feature status with this. ^_^ As a suggestion, it is considered Wikistyle to place the 'What is?' style section at the top above the Table of Contents in the form of a brief overview of the subject. This is sometimes called the Lead Section. I suggest following that link there to see Wikipedia's style guide on writing a good lead section. Remember that always in that section, you should write it as though the reader has some how stumbled on to the page totally by accident, so do establish any context, no matter how basic. :) Best of luck with the article and happy editing. --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 19:22, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the quick reply, the compliments and the advice! Almafeta, there is plenty of babyfur art out there. Marci gives customers copyright permissions for commissioned badges and I'm sure plenty babyfurs wouldn't mind contributing a copy. skippyfox 20:09, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I personally would use [1] (with the caption "Babyfurs in a nutshell"), if I could, but that would require the permission of both artist and player... not easy. Almafeta 20:34, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I already have the artist's permission to use this pic (I can forward the e-mail to you if you'd like). The character's player is nowhere to be found, it seems. If that fur is still around at all, I don't think he would mind, especially if credit is given. skippyfox 21:55, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Go ahead, then.  :) Almafeta 22:03, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Done! I might add a Marci badge art or something by the artist's section later on, too. skippyfox 23:12, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Quick Response[edit]

Hey GreenReaper. Thanks fur the uber-quick response to fix the babyfur article after it was spammed. I must appreciate all you admins do; I imagine the articles undergo inappropriate changes like that somewhat frequently. skippyfox 08:25, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I agree...you and the rest of the admins have been great catching vandalism. I imagine we'll probably see a bit of it today since you have the babyfur article featured. Rama 03:16, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Thanks! It's a lot easier now we have a lot more eyes watching recent changes for trouble, :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 03:20, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Category:Babyfurs[edit]

Not trying to be pretentious, but you removed the babyfur category for 'privacy', but your talk page mentions it often, and the links to art of SkippyFox show him as a babyfur...wouldn't you have to remove all of this in order to have this kept 'private'? Spaz Kitty

Talk pages are talk pages, used mostly in the development of wiki articles, and people should feel free to discuss things on them. Pages about users are a "public face" on their life. They have different audiences and therefore may contain differing content. Obviously, someone can come on here and make the deduction, if they choose to do so. However, putting a category tag on is a rather bigger thing, as it is essentially advertising it to anyone who comes across that page, or that category page.
My personal feeling (which I was just about to put on the appropriate talk page) is that it might be appropriate to only have people add that category to the article about them themselves. It has different meanings to different people, and while they may consider themselves one, they may not wish others to consider them one in a different context. Or, they may just view it as a personal detail.
If I were a member of the group, I might prefer to let people who want to know more about me as a person to find out, but not encourage people who were crusing through the Babyfurs category looking for people to mess with. I'd also rather not have us remove everything that could suggest the association just to satisfy the wish of not being categorized. --GreenReaper(talk) 22:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you very much for those words GreenReaper; you nearly took them right out of my mouth. :) While there are several hyperlinks on my page that will lead to babyfur-related content, I still feel better that the word "Babyfur" is not being announced so bluntly for everybody to see at 'first' glance. If a user would like to learn more about me, he might see images of me as a babyfur, which I actually consider to have much less potential shock value than the word 'babyfur' on the article itself. This is because there are hundreds of furs (presumably) who will see the word babyfur and immediately associate me with the sour apples in the bunch.
After further discussion with GreenReaper at AC I do understand that under other circumstances this issue would be treated quite differently. If my name was big in the fandom and strongly associated with babyfurs already, then there would obviously be no point in denying the fact in the article. Still, such a decision often requires careful judgment.
It is no secret that I am a babyfur, but with all things considered, I'd place higher priority on being a human being. :) skippyfox 22:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed an edit was made back in January against the preferences that I expressed here (granted, this is a 7 year old discussion anybody would miss). To restate things, I think Babyfur is a label that has a very cloudy definition...meaning I think it's a label for which most people's own definitions are inconsistent with how I would define it or how Wikifur defines it. Above I mentioned I'd rather my page not directly reference babyfurs, more or less for that reason.
You could look at it another way: As a rule I think it would be common courtesy to label a person by what he or she HAS or DOES (his or her roles or accomplishments), and not by who he or she IS. This is why it's reasonable to describe someone as an "artist" or a "fursuiter," but not as a "black person" or a "homosexual," even though there is objectively nothing wrong with those things. It's also why the Wikipedia article on Ellen DeGeneres identifies her as "stand-up comedian, television host, and actress," not as "a lesbian," even though she came out as one. The article does describe her self-proclaimed sexuality, but it doesn't begin first and foremost with it.
That's a rule I am comfortable with, so I wouldn't mind an article on me saying "Skippyfox identifies as a babyfur," which I do (and have admitted to here), but I do mind an article starting off with "Skippyfox is a babyfur." That tells the reader nothing about me other than that I am whatever the reader thinks a babyfur is. skippyfox 19:49, 20 September 2013 (EDT)

Image:Rieva-little.JPG[edit]

Hello Skippyfox,

This is in regards to Image:Rieva-little.JPG. 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 07:58, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Flag for Taiwan (Republic of China)[edit]

Can we get Taiwan's flag added to the flag template for Infurnity? Thanks! The country code is TW skippyfox (talk) 12:44, 29 October 2015 (EDT)

It looks like Higgs has made this happen (as 'twn'). --GreenReaper(talk) 09:46, 3 November 2015 (EST)
http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/User_talk:Skippyfox
en.wikifur.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-43
28630
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:74VYCTPC6K4XSDFWZYETULJ4ODQM5HVC
<urn:uuid:e28df396-e58a-4dfc-bc78-84b764830bd8>
2021-10-28T14:03:22Z
172.67.204.114
text/html
sha1:4QG6DDJMGRH3T4KH2JAHVZAZK2CXHTQW
<urn:uuid:ca1e7e44-4589-4a48-a4e4-15ef5653099b>
http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/User_talk:Skippyfox
response
<urn:uuid:e366de98-5df3-4252-8713-d413f6e59226>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-43
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for October 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-149
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/