Talk:Blaze Darkarma

Reason for revert

The majority of the edits I made within this article are wording cleanup, spelling and providing wikilinks to mentioned subjects. Regarding the removal of Orlando Furs links and logo, this information, I felt, was more appropriate in an article regarding the Orlando Furs themselves.--Kendricks Redtail 00:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Kendricks Redtail, in the process of using his administrative abilities, has taken it upon himself to completely butcher the layout of this article, which I personally find insulting. Not only has he linked incorrectly my official organization to the "Orlando Furs" page which is a page about furries who live in Orlando instead of the OFURS page, he has also taken it upon himself to remove the OFURS logo from this article which was my creation and has much to do with this article. His clean-up included the removal of colorful wording that make the article interesting to read, leaving a boring atmosphere. He also removed such Blaze's title "The Legendary Dragon of Light and Hope" which many who associate with this character, know him as. He has also removed all external links to my created group for which I'm known, taking away resources and links for users who read this page to navigate to other sites that Blaze is known for.

Kendricks, in addition to all of this, has been sifting specifically through articles created by my person, actively looking for any mistakes to poke out or ways to reorganize these entire article. I feel this as a personal attack upon me as a user and I'm offended. I'm sure if I went through his personal articles and rearranged his layouts, he'd be equally upset. Kendricks has also misrepresented one of the pictures on this article, in specific, the one of my fursuit. It says that I am the one in the fursuit; however, this is not true because that is not me wearing it. The only thing that is true, is that it is my suit.

In my opinion, Kendricks is a poor Wikifur Administrator. Even his own personal motto suggests carelessness on his personal page here in Wikifur, "I'm not a surgeon when it comes to editing; I'm a lumberjack!" I personally agree whole-heartedly with his quote, because that's sure how he has handled himself. Instead of carefully editing my article, he has chopped it into pieces and then glued it back together with inaccuracies, misrepresentation, and poor layout design.

This discussion will be pointed out to Green Reaper at the earliest convenience for him to decide appropriate actions. Until then, I will leave the article in it's current state to prevent any type of "war" on this article that would leave a history of redundant changes. --Blaze Darkarma 8:20pm EST, 7 March 2007

Well, those are some pretty heavy accusations there. I'll address this briefly as this site is not a battleground. First of all, I don't even know you. I have no reason to personally attack you. Before this day, I had never even seen your name. Let's run down the list. First of all, it's your own linking to the Orlando Furs thing. I did not touch that. Peruse the edit history. You made the mistake. Own up to it. Secondly, colorful wording. I removed a select few words and phrases to move the tone to a more encyclopedic. It's been done to me in the past. I've gotten over it and moved on. The external links had more relevance to the group itself than you. I'm an administrator of several websites. Those sites are not in my article. Frankly put, they are irrelevant to me. I have otherwise not edited anything except spelling errors and added captions to pictures as appropriate. If anyone reading this would like to confirm that, they are welcome to peruse http://en.wikifur.com/w/index.php?title=Blaze_Darkarma&diff=124302&oldid=123373 which is the edit in question. I'm sorry that correcting your spelling mistakes and offering helpful links to other related articles in the spirit of a wiki is offensive to you.--Kendricks Redtail 01:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I have no problem with your spelling corrections or added captions. I have a problem with you completely readjusting the layout of the article in "the name of wiki" making it cluttered and removing the colorful wording (Even if you had to get over it). You want this to read like exactly like a dry encyclopedia? Then I'll get to work on completely redoing this article and layout. --Blaze Darkarma 9:25pm EST, 7 March 2007

A few things I'd like to point out, from reading this conversation:

• Kendricks did not use any of his "administrative abilities" to make any of the edits in question. The only admin abilities he (and the rest of us who are admins) have is to block users and "rollback" a series of changes. In his edits, he only acted in his capacity as a WikiFur user, not an admin.

• Blaze Darkarma is not "your article". As I'm sure you noticed when editing, all contributions to WikiFur are released under the GNU Free Documentation License. Additionallly, anyone may edit an existing article, so long as their edits are in good faith. That being said, if you want to copy all of that content over to User:Blaze Darkarma, we are much more liberal with what goes on user pages and I don't think there would be as many issues.

• Regarding his "butchering" of the article, he edited the article in accordance with the Furry Book of Style. If you poke around some other articles on this website, especially the featured articles, you'll start to notice a certain "look and feel" to those articles. That "look and feel" came from articles which were on WikiPedia, which in turn evolved from "best practices" which were established over a period of some years.

• Regarding your alleged inaccuracies in Kendricks' edits, we all make mistakes sometimes. If he incorrectly labeled you in a picture, feel free to edit the article in question and fix that.

• Finally, I would suggest that you read through Help:Contents, WikiFur:Policies and guidelines, and possibly browse Special:Recentchanges on a regular basis to get a better idea of what goes on on this Wiki and how articles are changed. It will likely help your editing style in future edits.

--Douglas Muth 03:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I've read through your notations and accept that you are technically correct, the best kind of correct. Regardless, I have rewritten the article. I hope it conforms with your standards. --Blaze Darkarma 12:03am EST, 8 March 2007

Douglas has covered most of the issues I would have raised. I think it is important to remember to assume good faith when people are editing - even, and especially, when they are editing articles that are close to you. Remember that Kendricks, along with all of our administrators and regular users, have as their prime objective the improvement of WikiFur. We, in turn, will assume that this is your objective as well. It is not just up to administrators to change pages that other people have written (everyone can), nor do you necessarily have to agree with their changes - but they usually have good reasons for doing so, and if you do not understand them then the best thing to do is ask.

Be assured that we are not just picking out your edits for special treatment. Just about every edit to WikiFur is checked over in one way or another, through the use of the recent changes list. If you look through there you can see the many other changes that are made throughout the day. Other members may or may not decide to change a page, depending on whether they think they can improve it, and how much time they have on their hands (I've had to work late these last few months, and often can't change more than one or two things late in the day, but fortunately there are others who have more time available).

As noted, the intended tone of this site is encyclopedic. This is not a story archive, or a character description depot (there are other places for that). It is intended primarily for people, as a neutral reference to their activities. Concise, information-rich and plain writing is the order of the day. It is not necessary for writing to be "boring", but overly-flowery phrases are probably best-saved for stories. We also try to keep information like links in one place - the most appropriate place - and direct users there, as redundant information is not as easy to update. We want people to find out about things here if the can rather than force them to go to another site (especially if it's gone down, or moved, as furry sites often do). --GreenReaper^(talk) 05:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)