Revision as of 19:36, 31 May 2023 edit2601:5c8:4300:41f0:9cca:6262:bd6a:50d7 (talk) →Leviticus 20:15: new sectionTags: Reverted New topic← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:44, 31 May 2023 edit undoEquivamp (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,123 edits Undid revision 1157914401 by 2601:5C8:4300:41F0:9CCA:6262:BD6A:50D7 (talk)Tags: Undo Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile editNext edit → | ||
Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
::::2008 is horribly out of date, and I'm not actually sure Furry Research Center is an RS. Unless someone can find a more recent one, we should probably just strike this entire topic. — <b>]:<sup>]</sup></b> 18:42, 30 April 2023 (UTC) | ::::2008 is horribly out of date, and I'm not actually sure Furry Research Center is an RS. Unless someone can find a more recent one, we should probably just strike this entire topic. — <b>]:<sup>]</sup></b> 18:42, 30 April 2023 (UTC) | ||
:::::I agree ] (]) 21:28, 30 April 2023 (UTC) | :::::I agree ] (]) 21:28, 30 April 2023 (UTC) | ||
== Leviticus 20:15 == | |||
Leviticus 20:15 if a man has sexual relations with an animal,m the man shall be put to death, and you shall kill the animal, hmmmmmmmm I wonder who disobeys this Bible's rule? ] (]) 19:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:44, 31 May 2023
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Furry fandom article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Furry fandom. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Furry fandom at the Reference desk. |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Furry fandom was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
To-do list for Furry fandom: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2019-02-16
|
Archives |
See also: |
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Dubious tags in sexuality
So currently the article says furries are more likely to be gay/bi/lesbian by a factor of ten, which appears to be a bit of synthesis from a Gallup poll unconcerned with furry sexuality. There are dubious tags on the poll's percentage of bisexual/gay/lesbian Americans for no reason that I can find. What's dubious about it and should this seeming synthesis even be in the article? XeCyranium (talk) 03:42, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, it seems to me that the "factor of 10" claim should be considered original research. I don't, however, understand the tags placed on the statistical claims on LGBT identification, as they are directly stated in the given source. I think that the "factor of 10" claim should be removed or adequately sourced, and that the tags should be removed on the other claims. 22090912l (talk) 21:28, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- yeah i feel like that needs some more solid evidence and verification Frostwolf74 (talk) 04:46, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
Lead image
OPTION 2 AND CHANGE IMAGE PLACEMENT. Given the lack of participation in this discussion there appears to be consensus to change the image to option 2 given the previous discussion while swapping the lead image's placement with that of one depicting furries attending a furry convention. The lead image can be replaced with one that more accurately reflects the subject of the article without prior consensus if one is found. ― Blaze WolfBlaze Wolf#6545 18:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC)The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
So in a discussion above, there was some talk about possibly changing the image used in the lead of the article. 2 images were proposed to change, so as to not show any bias towards one particular image from my personal opinion, I'll leave it up to a !vote.
- Option 1: Current image in the article
- Option 2: A more modern image than what appears in the article. Option 2: A more modern image than what appears in the article.
- Option 3: A modernized version of the current image by the same artist.
If there are no comments within 7 days then I'll go ahead and use Option 2 unless there are some objections since that seems to be the one that most people preferred in the above discussion. ― Blaze WolfBlaze Wolf#6545 20:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- While I think option 2 is the better image to use, I'd prefer if the first image presented in the article was of people in fursuits, as this appears to be the main focus of the article. I'm not sure where this image could be move to, though. Isabelle Belato 21:31, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- I could probably just swap around this image with the fursuiter one. ― Blaze WolfBlaze Wolf#6545 02:56, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- The article is about people, not cartoon images. The lead image should represent the subject of the article. Possibly an image of an individual in a fursuit isn't truly representative of furries in general (of whom only a minority own full fursuits, according to the article), but it is certainly preferable to one that doesn't illustrate the article subject at all. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes I do agree, which is why I can swap around where the images are in the article. ― Blaze WolfBlaze Wolf#6545 14:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Gender percentage doesn't match source
In the part "sociological aspects" there is the sentence "78–85% of furries identify as male, the remaining identify as female; while most are cisgender, 2% are transgender.:10" However, if you look at the source attached ( Plante, Courtney N.; Reysen, Stephen; Roberts, Sharon E.; Gerbasi, Kathleen C. (2016). FurScience! A summary of five years of research from the International Anthropomorphic Research Project (PDF). Waterloo, Ontario: FurScience. ISBN 978-0-9976288-0-7. Archived from the original on April 24, 2017. Retrieved December 27, 2016.) the data in that source is:
"Sex: Male 72.4% Sex: Female 27.4% Sex: Intersex 0.2%
Gender: Masculine 67.1% Gender: Feminine 23.3% Genderqueer/Non-Binary: 10.0%" Which isn't the same as what is stated in the Misplaced Pages article. I cannot seem to find where the original data came from. (The "2% are transgender" part of the sentence is consistent with the data in this source though, as they also asked people that specifically identify as transgender, and that percentage was 2%)
Furthermore, there are more recent surveys held by the IARP that should also be taken into consideration for the Misplaced Pages article. I have checked for the gender ratios and for that aspect there are more recent studies which have different data. While I have only checked for the gender ratio data thus far, I personally think that more information in the "sociological aspects" could probably be updated with more recent data, as it currently mostly cites the same data from 2017 TransDragonLira (talk) 09:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- @TransDragonLira: I've looked through the article's history, and those numbers appear to come from an earlier research by the same group (from around 2012). The research was updated without updating the actual numbers, so it should be fine to change them to match the source. Since that research is from 2016, having more recent numbers would be very helpful, so if you have good sources, share them here so we can take a look. Thanks. Isabelle Belato 12:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ah yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
- This link is the official website of the IARP, listing off their recent findings in their 2021-2022 studies, including some older data from 2017, 2018, and 2020. https://furscience.com/research-findings/demographics/1-3-sex-and-gender/
- However, it seems my suspicions about more things possibly needing to be updated were incorrect, sorry about that. The rest of their findings in the 2021-2022 studies have not yet been published, so it seems it'll have to wait untill it is possible to update the rest of the socialogical aspects section https://twitter.com/furscience/status/1561104933717528577 TransDragonLira (talk) 17:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Classification as a Counterculture
While the fandom has become more mainstream in recent years, I think there is an argument that the furry fandom is a counterculture. Countercultures are defined as, " A culture whose values and norms of behavior deviate from those of mainstream society." I hold the belief that the fandom fits this definition. However I have yet to include this in the article due to lack of reliable sources. Neo CyberLich (talk) 14:30, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- I'm fairly certain it has been referred to as counterculture in the past but, yes, we'd need cites for it. — The Hand That Feeds You: 15:34, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- Do you have any idea how to research citations for something likely to be obscure? Neo CyberLich (talk) 15:48, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- You'd be looking for books & articles on counter-culture movements, as well as ones specifically about furries. I won't have time to dig into it this week, but I'll see what I can find later. — The Hand That Feeds You: 15:55, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- Do you have any idea how to research citations for something likely to be obscure? Neo CyberLich (talk) 15:48, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 29 April 2023
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hi , maybe you shouldnt talk abt zoophilia as now the result of this survey is less than 2% 2A04:CEC0:1010:9622:8162:D3F1:777D:E319 (talk) 19:55, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- Could you clarify which survey you are referring to? AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:00, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jalen Folf (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- Although it is relatively insignificant, it is an important piece of information that should be included. Frostwolf74 (talk) 04:16, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- Again, we need a source. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- oh i see Frostwolf74 (talk) 16:40, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- The source is right here for the survey that got 2%. The source for the other one that got 17% is on page 26 of this. Though I have noticed that the source in the article for the first one leads to a broken website that isn't available so that source is no longer reliable and needs to be updated. I have also noticed that the source for the second one says 17.1% rather than 17%, Although it is minor it should be updated to say 17.1%. Frostwolf74 (talk) 17:26, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- 2008 is horribly out of date, and I'm not actually sure Furry Research Center is an RS. Unless someone can find a more recent one, we should probably just strike this entire topic. — The Hand That Feeds You: 18:42, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- I agree Frostwolf74 (talk) 21:28, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- 2008 is horribly out of date, and I'm not actually sure Furry Research Center is an RS. Unless someone can find a more recent one, we should probably just strike this entire topic. — The Hand That Feeds You: 18:42, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- Again, we need a source. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- Former good article nominees
- Old requests for peer review
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class furry articles
- Top-importance furry articles
- B-Class sociology articles
- Mid-importance sociology articles
- B-Class LGBTQ+ studies articles
- WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies articles
- Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists