Talk:Canternet

Deletion

I think that an IRC channel for roleplaying anthropomorphic horses belongs here. (After all, we have articles about things such as The Lion King MUCK, which is just as "non-furry". --Equivamp - talk 02:54, 4 August 2015 (EDT)

We also have Category:My Little Pony multiplayer worlds. They don't get much editing, but nor do most of the other multiplayer worlds.

It might be appropriate to consider coverage on other wikis, though, such as Canternet on Gyropedia. We don't cover some topics in depth because they are covered on Wikipedia. (Of course, as we know, Wikia isn't Wikipedia…) --GreenReaper^(talk) 02:55, 4 August 2015 (EDT)

I have restored the articles for now and added an "Inappropriate" template to each. I think deletions of articles like this should be discussed, and I also think Spirou has been, intentionally or otherwise, making Chocolate Chip feel unwelcome and unappreciated, even though his edits have been in good faith, trying to improve the wiki, even if he's still learning how things are done here. I think had I been treated similarly when I first joined, I would have left and had a bad view of WikiFur as a community. --Equivamp - talk 03:07, 4 August 2015 (EDT)

"Spirou has been, intentionally or otherwise, making Chocolate Chip feel unwelcome and unappreciated". Excuse me?!. One, other fandom articles (anime, manga, science fiction, etc,...) have been deleted without discussion, or (most frequently) merged inside other main articles (like in this case, relevant enough to keep within the main MLP article). The Lion King does not have an associate fandom per se, but it's heavily preferred subject by furry mostly, so that is not quite a good analogy.

Two, I don't know Chocolate Chip, and the only (first) interaction I had with the subject was regarding the article Chocolate Chip, which is in dire need of a major edit pass, which I'm (I was, unless this is going to drop a drama bomb on the premises) in the process of doing so. If anything, it seems I have to walk on egg shells for the last 48 hours with anything regarding this individual and related edits by this person. What the heck happened that an editor that they cannot now make edits based on prior Wikifur editorial norms?.

"making Chocolate Chip feel unwelcome and unappreciated", really. Okay, so i guess the article Chocolate Chip is off limits?. Please advice whay I can or cannot do. - Spirou (talk) 03:27, 4 August 2015 (EDT)

I do not feel Unwelcome. I am simply trying to make edits, which a number of people agree with, and you, User:Spirou are interfering with. I don't know why, either. No, Chocolate Chip is not “Off Limits”, as you say, but the edits that I have made are fair and conforming to the standards of the website. Furthermore, you have deleted the two articles I created without discussion. I don't feel unwelcomed, as User:Equivamp had said, but I feel as if you have it our for me or something. Just allow me to make edits (which are not vandalism or otherwise) and allow yourself to make your own edits. --Chocolate Chip (talk) 03:36, 4 August 2015 (EDT)

"and you, User:Spirou are interfering with". That's an opinion not a fact. "But I feel as if you have it our for me or something", again, an opinion, not a fact, and a very unsocial, insulting allegation, along other lines such that I'm a vandal and creating unneeded drama.

"Allow yourself to make your own edits", no, can't do, because the first time I came even near the Chocolate Chip article and started working on it, you inferred that I "esentially vandalized the article". If anything, the moment I touched anything related to you (including present articles) your demeanor regarding any of my contributing edits have resulted on insults, insinuations and total lack of respect on your part. You haven't being called on your uncouth behavior, but you have well got people convinced that somehow I have a vendetta towards your persona.

And I don't even dare touch/tweak the latest edits you made to the Doug Winger article, lest you again insinuate X (harassment, vandalism, editorial interference, etc,...). - Spirou (talk) 04:19, 4 August 2015 (EDT)

I am not accusing you of being a vandal, and I am not saying that I want myself to be the only one to modify my own article. I am not saying that I want the ability to make edits to the whole of WikiFur with complete, unadulterated control. I am not saying that changing my own edits to the Doug Winger article will constitute “harrasment”. What I AM saying is that you are needlessly modifying edits of mine, deleting entire articles I created, and continuing the drama that I want to end. I don't want to continue this, which you seem to not realize. I'm not getting protective over what you think I'm claiming as “My Articles”, but saying that you are needlessly editing what does not need to be edited, and in turn causing nonsense. I have no malice in what I am doing, nor do I have resentment against you. I just want a page to be edited correctly, which I am doing.--Chocolate Chip (talk) 04:33, 4 August 2015 (EDT)

Spirou, I am not trying to tell you what you "can or cannot do", or that the article about Chocolate Chip is off-limits. I am not even trying to be disrespectful, but I do believe that you are treating Chocolate Chip's edits more harshly than you would a regular editor, when that is the opposite of how new editors should be treated. Instead of giving any kind of advice, what you have done is:

• essentially locked down the article about him through misuse of the "In use" tag (misused because the template was not used to prevent edit conflicts, but instead was used so that you could save an edit halfway, then leave do to issues in real life without other edits being made in between, essentially treating the mainspace article like a personal sandbox)
• only interacted with him through edit summaries, which, due to required brevity, must be blunt, and cannot be replied to.
  • That is, of course, until this conversation, in which you were very aggressive and rude, as well as stating you felt you had to "walk on eggshells" around a user, whom you have both social and technical power over here on WikiFur, the minute it was suggested you weren't treating him fairly.

Chocolate Chip, if you wanted to have sole control over a page about yourself, you should have made the article into a new webpage on a site where you have sole control. However, WikiFur is a wiki, and that means that anyone can edit. We do not allow certain articles to be edited by only one user. WikiFur is an encyclopedia, not a biography for your blog. --Equivamp - talk 15:00, 4 August 2015 (EDT)

Equivamp, no matter at I say, it's set on stone, so nothing I can respond to or refute would work or convince or bring anything to the conversation. 72 hours ago i was taking a break from RL jobs and jumped to Wikifur to do some editing to decompress, saw you working, of all things, on this now often mentioned article, and decided to help with it...

If I had continued working on those props through the weekend, I would ended up really frustrated on all the asinine changes a Prop Director can write (fill/cram) a 12 field page with regarding each bloody item by this morn, but I will be blessedly done. 72 later, with a Wikifur break, well, here we are.

...So. Deletion of obvious non-related furry fandom articles will now be up to discussion, not immediate removal. What will be the time frame to make the deletion final if there is no discussion, as there are articles still in need of final closure. - Spirou (talk) 16:28, 4 August 2015 (EDT)