Talk:Fuzzy dice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Origin 2 Deleted Image 3 Illegality (or lack thereof) 4 Prod 5 notability

[edit] Origin

Does anyone know why furry/fuzzy dice? Was it initially meant to say something about the owners gambling nature, for instance? Loris 19:00, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted Image

Why the image of fuzzy dice was deleted, eh?--Xinjinbei 00:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC) yhyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!

[edit] Illegality (or lack thereof)

Researching this topic, I ran across a lawyer's website (http://www.sheltonlegal.net/html/ask_a_lawyer_.html) shedding a little light on the topic. Basically, he says fuzzy dice are probably not an issue, but may be used as an excuse to stop you for something else. - Striker (talk) 03:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prod

I decided to remove the prod tag. There actually are sources that could be used in the article, like this, this, this, this, etc. Zagalejo^^^ 00:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay; fair enough. (That's the point of the tag, to see if anyone can find/assert references.) VigilancePrime (talk) 00:32, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] notability

Ok someone put up a template complaining this is not notable enough for inclusion. I am disputing this tag. Fuzzy dice are ubiquitous at joke shops, auto supply shops, and carnivals, have been promoted, ridiculed, and featured in countless movies and television programs. Will someone in authority please reomove the tag? --Ted-m (talk) 04:15, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

How is this Notable? Anyone can remove the PROD tag; that's the point of the tag, to see who's watching, improving, or if the article really has no interest, value, and editors. That said, please temper comments such as "someone ignorant of this subject" with civility and an assumption of good faith. Some who are more sensitive or looking for fights (yes, there are some) would possibly see that comment as a personal attack.

Lastly, the article needs some sort of referencing so as to cite some sort of sources both for it's claim of notability and for verifiability of the factual accuracy of the content.

That's all that is needed. Other than that, have fun with editing and expanding the article! VigilancePrime (talk) 04:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC) (post-note - edit conflict! - thank you for removing the "ignorant" part. I'm sure it was not meant negatively and I appreciate your having modified it immediately.)

On another note, I realize it's not the PROD tag you're disputing (that one had been removed), but the notability one. That one hopefully attracts attention to the article so it can be sourced. Above another editor gave some links; feel free to use them and cite them to address the concerns noted in the various tags. That's the point of the tags, to help the long-term improvement of the article. Best of luck! VigilancePrime (talk) 04:26, 30 December 2007 (UTC)