User talk:Ostrich

Just so you know, when the name of a person is a species, we make that article about the species, and then add a disambiguation leader. For example, the Ostrich article would be about ostriches, and have something like this at the top:

Ostrich is also the name of an artist.

See the wolf article to see what I mean.

And in other news: Welcome to WikiFur.  :) Almafeta 15:27, 16 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Signature shortcut

Hiya! Here's a handy tip: when you're editing and you have the little toolbar over the edit window, all you have to do is click on the button with the squiggle (second from the right) to put a name/time/date stamp in (which is really just the characters --~~~~).--Duncan da Husky 17:59, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Coolies! Thanks! --Ostrich^(talk) 18:09, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

First-person articles

To the extent that this wiki can be considered a history, it's an unusual one, in that the people writing it are in many cases the people about whose deeds it is being written.

In particular point of fact, there's been a debate in the article Burned_Furs about whether and to what extent BF's behaviour resulted in the Vanity_Fair article. I'm quite able to give an authoritative answer to this question, but it would require that I abandon the neutral, third-person PoV which seems to be the wiki standard. I'm sure I'm not the only person in such a position.

Is there a standard in place to allow first-person information to be added, when relevant to the topic? --Ostrich^(talk) 07:57, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for replying to this late - I didn't see it as it got put at the end of another section. I would suggest that you write it on a subpage of your user space (like User:Ostrich/Burned Furs and Vanity Fair, then link to it appropriately in the main article. You should also put {{personal-article|Ostrich}} at the bottom to make it clear to anyone who's reading that it's a personal opinion article. --GreenReaper^(talk) 00:05, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)