Comments:Furry fans flock to Further Confusion 2007

Comments moved from collaboration page at 17:49, 24 November 2007 (UTC) by Shaggorama

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

• Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
• Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
• You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Click here to add a new comment · Add onto existing comments

For the sake of all that can be considered newsworthy, is there anyone else who thinks this SHOULDN'T be front page Wikinews to be displayed worldwide?

Yeah, I agree with that, I also notice that Wikinews is about to shut me off as being a loud mouth. Tag it [[Category:Local only]] and see if that works for removal from MainPage. Somehow the ground is shifting. -Edbrown05 11:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Not sure how it qualifies as "local only" - the convention may be in San Jose, but the attendees aren't all from the region by a long shot. I flew in from Detroit to be there, and there are probably over a hundred who come from overseas (extrapolating from Anthrocon's 2005 figures). One poor guy I know even visits regularly from Russia. GreenReaper 15:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Call me strange, but I find in-depth original news reporting about how people live backed by sources far more interesting than one-paragraph rephrasing of wire news reports about how people have died - especially when I can get the latter from anywhere. :-) Citizen reporting gets you the news that citizens (or, in my case, legal aliens) think is interesting. If Wikinews really wants to restrict itself to featuring hard news then it's going to find it hard to attract much long-term interest, because other places tend to do it so much better. As I see it, the site's key advantage is that it can have this kind of story, just as Wikipedia's advantage is the topics that no other encyclopedia covers. As noted on Category talk:Local only, perhaps when Wikinews has fifty great articles a day it'll be an issue - but we're not there yet. GreenReaper 15:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• Who says this shouldn't be on the front page? This should be listed under its day like any other story. If we did have 50+ stories per day then it shouldn't be one of the ones on the main page, but we don't - and even when we do we should probably include things like this from time to time to keep readers' interest. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 17:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Welldone article that deserve to be featured. international 23:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with international. (not entirely sure if refering to same featuring process) This is an example of what wikinews should be (IMHO). Bawolff ☺☻ 02:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

<Comment here was removed by bawolff, as bawolff thought it was not very nice, and the user making it appears to not be able to act nicely (I'm refering to stuff other then this comment) for the curious >

[Fatured article candidate notice used to be here. it hasa since been premoted to featured]

GreenReaper is not strange. Conventions at Wikinews are basically unknown and unestablished. -Edbrown05 03:22, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

whats next?

An article on a NAMBLA convention? I think that articles on perverted filth such as this shouldn't be mainpaged, leave it to those who actually care. Furries need to stop masterbating to animal penises 137.112.141.152 07:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd certainly be interested in a good article on a NAMBLA convention, as it appears a relatively uncovered topic, though I fear media passes may be harder to get than for a furry con (and they're pretty hard). GreenReaper 16:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

This is honestly a huge embarrassment. I will no longer consider working with WikiNews. This is a major travesty and to be protected from edits and remain on the front page reveals this site to be run by pathetic nerds seeking a voice for vanity reasons. This is the absolute OPPOSITE of quality journalism. (preceding unsigned comment by 220.5.254.102 )

It was protected from anonymous edits for quite valid reasons. If there is a problem with something in the story, you're welcome to suggest a fix here and an administrator can have a look at it - or just get an account. GreenReaper 22:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

While it is your right to express opposition to the fandom, based on your limited and biased knowledge from CSI, I see no reason to criticise the quality of the journalism. Please, get an account and create an article to represent what you feel is "quality journalism". Wikinews only works with participation from our readers. -- Zanimum 22:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not a matter of whether or not this is quality journalism. It is a well-written article, but it's being presented as news as much as a former astronaut being charged with attempted murder. This is not international news, and it is not important enough for people outside of this niche culture to know about. I realize it may not be my place to say what qualifies as news and what doesn't, but at the very least, this needs to be removed and placed into local news. A hundred foreigners doesn't make it international.

Well then we have a difference of opinion (I fully support this being on the main page, just like I think its great how Wikipedia puts stuff like AYBABTU on the main page). I think a great many people also feel this is important/interesting enough to be on the main page. You're not forced to read it if you don't want to. Bawolff ☺☻ 23:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in Wikinews. Wikinews is a collaboratively produced news source and the selection of topics it covers depends considerably on the interests of its many volunteer contributors. If you would like to see articles on other subjects that you think are important to cover, you are welcome to make a start by contributing such articles.

As for the present article, if you beieve it is not newsworthy, do let us know why you think so on this talk page - also take a look at Wikinews:What Wikinews is and Wikinews:Content guide, which determine whether the article's content is appropriate for Wikinews. Do keep your comments civil and remember that those who have worked on the article believe it is important enough to expend their time and energy on it.

Note that reporting on events that are interesting, but that do not have tangible significance has long been a feature of news reporting. Wikinews too does its share of such articles. Furthermore, all recently published articles are listed on the main page, not just the most "significant" ones ( it is not a newspaper "front page"). Sometimes interesting articles are also listed as a Featured article among the top three leads. — Doldrums(talk) 07:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh no...

I have been happy with this site, never feeling I needed to sign up to contribute because I had nothing to add. I've never even posted on a talk page bfore typing this now.

I just had to express my single feeling on this matter. With this on the main page, I feel like WikiNews has been raped. This is horrible.

---

I agree. I come to this site because I trust these sources far more than typical news sites, and the thought that we're allowing an article with no international, national, and barely a hint of local significance to be on the main page is a shot against that mentality. I understand that people may have their own interests that I don't partake in, but there needs to be a line drawn. The things we choose to be nerds over are not important to everyone, and we can't expect them to be.

Hmm. Are you saying you don't trust the story, or that it isn't important enough to be on the front page? They're two different things. :-)

Remember, "featured" does not necessarily mean "important". I'm assuming it was put there by international because he felt it was well done and a good example of the reporting style and formatting that Wikinews users should emulate, not because it was vital for the rest of the human race to hear about that particular story. I know that's what we do at WikiFur - we select the best articles, which are often not the articles on the "most important" topics. It would be unlikely for such a story to gain the first lead (the topmost article link), but the third lead position is there specifically for human interest stories - though, admittedly, "human" is stretching it here . . . GreenReaper 02:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Pardon the apt metaphor, but I could write an article of the samequality about thehugeshit I just took that gestroyed the toilet. Probably be more valued as "human interest" too. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.198.140.119 (talk • contribs)

I hope no one features an article on Star Trek. I don't want to read about those Kirk/Spock slash perverts. That's all they ever write about, right? I read about it on the intertubes. Coyoty 06:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I like the one where Kirk is an ocelot! GreenReaper 06:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

<comment removed> — Doldrums(talk) 09:24, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Furries make me want to vomit. 65.6.213.12 22:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, so some folks want to be stuffed animals

So how are they perverts? Rickyrab 15:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I think it's all the yiffing furpiles that we're meant to get involved in. I sure wish I could find one. I've been to five conventions so far, but the closest I got was a scritch! GreenReaper 19:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)