72.207.228.114 05:28, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Something else to consider - before you go adding adult images to the article you might want to review WP:PORN and WP:PROFA. Ochlophobia 01:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC) I find it very highly unlikely none of the editors of the furry wikipedia or the furry editors of this wikipedia have any images of furry art or yiffing. GreenReaper 04:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC) Tony Fox had the right idea when he mentioned not feeding. That's how to effect change - by doing the work yourself. As Kesh said, if you think an image is a suitable addition to the article, you need to go and obtain permission to upload it here. And really, complaining about the article and then telling us that we have to spend time to fix it to your satisfaction isn't going to get you very far. Kesh 23:37, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Most furries draw some kind of furry stuff, can't a furry Wikipedian contribute an image?- 72.207.228.114 04:13, 23 September 2007 (UTC) We're furry writers, not furry artists. Those images are copyrighted and we cannot use them here until they are released under a free license. Tony Fox (arf!) 18:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC) The pictures should be in the article as an example of yiffing and furry artwork - 72.207.228.114 23:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC) If you're serious about this, contact the artists and get them to release those images under the GDFL or Creative Commons licenses. Loganberry ( Talk) 16:54, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Obvious trolling he's linked to three pictures, not reliable sources, and there's no valid criticism being referred to. I suppose that depends on whether you think it's a genuine discussion about how to improve the article, or just plain trolling. Loganberry ( Talk) 14:44, 22 September 2007 (UTC) That's true of the article itself, but I think he was referring to the removal of the discussions here on the talk page. Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.165.246.9 ( talk) 06:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Whether it's criticism or praise is entirely irrelevant: if it doesn't adhere to the verifiability and reliable sources policies, then it shouldn't be here. Mwalimu59 04:47, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Please stop removing criticism of furries and the furry fandom. What other "deviant sexual furry activities" did you have in mind? If you can find reliable references you're free to add them to the article. Most furry fans do not approve of bestiality, for the reason you cite among others. Violating an animal is a cruel practice.- 76.165.246.9 00:52, 20 September 2007 (UTC) So, that's three examples of adult furry art, which is already discussed in the article. This article seems way too tolerant of the bestiality of furries. I will try to put more examples of furries into the article. This article seems to omit mention of deviant sexual furry activities which are documented online in several places. The following discussion has been closed. Just mention that the discussion has gone off topic.- Nationalism 01:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC) This discussion has been closed. Kesh 00:49, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Stop doing this. Please? We can discuss improving the article through the use of appropriate images without these distractions. This time, without the off-topic banter about geekiness, sexuality, and the fandom in general. Feel free to start a new header about the subject of artwork in the article. Once again, I've archived this debate, as it's gone completely off-topic.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |