Talk:Animal transformation fantasy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] See Alsos
I wonder if maybe the suit/tie fetishism doesn't quite fit here, since it doesn't really hinge on an element of transformation. The two could certainly overlap, but one isn't dependent on the other. -- Mattymatt 12:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Links
All of the links could basically be considered advertising. They are not informational sites on the topic. Wikipedia is not a fan directory, however, I can understand that you may take my actions as a blanket delete. I probably should have deleted them one week at a time to let you know that I did go and look at them. Lotusduck 20:42, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
You probably should not delete them at all, because you seem to using your unfamiliarity with a subject as an excuse to delete what you don't understand, or fill its article with unnecessary citation tags. You are doing this with several articles related to furry fandom, it seems, without considering that these articles, like any others on Wikipedia, are written and edited by people who know what they are talking about. If there were anything questionable, they would and do question it, and have been long before you came along. If you question these subjects, please discuss it in the Talk pages instead of deleting what you know nothing about or using citation tag overkill. --Coyoty 06:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC) I remved the final link as it lead to a site that was people online fantasies not disscussion about these types of fantasies thus I feel it doesnt belong here.
Knowing what you're talking about and writing it down without creating references for others to check your work amounts to original research. All information must be verifiable through sources cited as per wikipedia guidelines. I put the tags on not for information being untrue, but for needing the same verification that all pages do. Please read wikipedia guidelines on original research. Lotusduck 20:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
By your reasoning, then, every single statement on Wikipedia has to be sourced, which is untenable. The guidelines are guidelines, not rules, and as such should be used within reason. You are trying to impose a level of verification on the furry fandom pages that is not applied to most of the other pages on Wikipedia. That is tantamount to using verification tags as a form of spamming and harrassment, IMO. Coyoty 00:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Stub
I've removed all the conjecture, original research and unsourced assertions from the article. It now reads as a very short, descriptive and to the point stub. Any further additions or assertions in the article should be cited with a ref or some source. I've also moved the relavent wikilinks into the body of the stub for format and ease of reading while removing those that have only a peripheral connection with the topic. NeoFreak 02:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
