Talk:Fursona

Dropping some sources

I don't have the time to comb through these and make edits myself at the moment, but I figured I'd drop the sources I've found in to help prove notability and keep the article alive in the meantime:

• Keeping the Magic: Fursona Identity and Performance in the Furry Fandom
• Self as Gem, Fursona as Facet(s): Constructions and Performances of Self in Furry Fandom
• My fursona and me: a tail of identity
• A Furry Friend: An Autoethnography on the Relationship Between Gender Identity and Fursonas

Between this and the existing sources I think there's more than enough to establish this as a notable subject :3

Housetiger 🏡🐯 (he/him + ze/hir) 🔸 talk 🔸 contrib 🔸 10:41, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Housetiger most of them look reliable but the last one is probably not ideal.CycoMa (talk) 08:38, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

How about this Housetiger you add these sources in and I’ll twek some details up.CycoMa (talk) 22:02, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Alright! I've added a heap of information mostly from the first and third links. Thanks for giving the sources a look over for me. Housetiger 🏡🐯 (he/him + ze/hir) 🔸 talk 🔸 contrib 🔸 12:58, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Why is Hsu & Baley (2019) used as a citation on this page for the claim, "Acting out one's fursona in person may involve wearing a fursuit"? Certainly Maase (2015) can suffice as a citation (to say nothing of a dozen others)[and why is more than one needed for what is by now virtually a platitude], but it is certainly strange to prefer Hsu & Bailey (2019) over the best-established Furry researchers' work, namely Plante, Reysen et al, 2016 as likely the most suitable citation. Consequently, the reference to this study should be removed from this page.

Wrong page numbers

I think someone added the wrong page numbers to this article. And that someone might be me, I may have to go throw the sources and cite the proper pages.CycoMa (talk) 22:46, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Stop the image edit warring

We do not need constant fights on this page over the fursona image. Here is the timeline of recent events:

• Originally, the article has no image. (Special:PermaLink/1052123389)
• User:CycoMa1 adds File:Rooccoon (Amuztak).jpg with the WP:ES →‎Fursona § Fursona species: I think this image is good enough. Plus it has been used across the Wiki. in Special:Diff/1053071082. To be clear, this is a good edit given the state of the Commons at the time it was made.
• I see the page, and decide, as the image in question has JPEG artifacting, is low resolution (375x), and is of unclear provenance, to donate art I commissioned, File:Fred Brennan fursona animation.gif, to the Commons, and exhaustively document its copyright to put this issue to bed once and for all. (Special:Diff/1078217134)
• New user FurBoi21 replaces the image with a copyvio, File:Furboi Furry Art.png, currently in process of removal from the Commons. User:Discospinster correctly reverts (Special:Diff/1081372355).
• Another new user, Aldordema, adds another copyvio unrelated to the first, File:CorgiFurry.png. This is another copyvio. They also upload File:SchwerwiegendArt.jpg, a third copyvio. I mark both per c:Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion § F1.

Now, to be absolutely clear, I have no problem with whatever image ends up being used, but we don't need endless replacements. Users should stop and discuss the issue here, familiarize themselves with Wikipedia's copyright policies and those of the Commons, and then once we have multiple actual non-copyvio candidates, we can decide which to use.

@CycoMa1, Discospinster, FurBoi21, and Aldordema: So far, my image, File:Fred Brennan fursona animation.gif, is the only suitable image on the Commons which has no technical issues, either of resolution or compression artifacts. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 20:47, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

@Psiĥedelisto: I support the use of your commissioned image, however I think having an animated image as the leading image for an article is a bit distracting. I assume that making it a still image wouldn't otherwise change its suitability? What do you think about that? ~ Housetiger 🏡🐯 (he/him + ze/hir) 🔸 talk 🔸 contrib 🔸 12:30, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

That's certainly fine! I can extract a frame if you don't know how, Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 16:47, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

@Psiĥedelisto: I would appreciate if you could do that, yeah :) ~ Housetiger 🏡🐯 (he/him + ze/hir) 🔸 talk 🔸 contrib 🔸 19:13, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Done! File:Fred Brennan fursona animation frame.png. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 19:47, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

@Housetiger: How does the new image look? I thought a Wikipedia-related one would be better, also this one is arguably "more SFW" as he has shorts in it. Thoughts? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 18:56, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

@Psiĥedelisto I think it's the blush and the coy expression that's got people riled up :P I think it's harmless enough, though (and frankly pretty representative of the furry community) so I'm for it. Housetiger 🏡🐯 (he/him + ze/hir) 🔸 talk 🔸 contrib 🔸 17:01, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

i wanna kiss fred's fursona and buy them dinner ok bye Hollihop (talk) 23:17, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

2.12 fursonas

This is the figure in the lead for how many fursonas the average furry has over their lifetime. How do you have 2.12 fursonas, though? It seems like a silly statistic to not use a whole number for, and it trips me up every time I read this article. However, that is what the source says. Would rounding down to 2 in the article be in violation of some policy, or are we allowed to do that for the sake of making more sense? Could we phrase it as 'just over two' instead? ~ Housetiger 🏡🐯 (he/him + ze/hir) 🔸 talk 🔸 contrib 🔸 14:01, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

@Housetiger: I think we can write "between two and three". Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 18:57, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

@Psiĥedelisto That sounds reasonable to me. Done! Housetiger 🏡🐯 (he/him + ze/hir) 🔸 talk 🔸 contrib 🔸 09:46, 3 July 2022 (UTC)