Talk:Rowrbrazzle

This article was nominated for deletion on 2007 March 27. The result of the discussion was No consensus.

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Furry Mid‑importance

	Rowrbrazzle is within the scope of WikiProject Furry, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to furry fandom. For more information, visit the project page.FurryWikipedia:WikiProject FurryTemplate:WikiProject Furryfurry articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Finding Sources[edit]

Since it appears the mini-fracas about deleting this article had to do with the paucity of sources about Rowrbrazzle, the question comes up: does anyone have anything that would verify Rowrbrazzle's existence in a way that makes people happier with its presence here? It doesn't strike me as something that's less significant than many of the pop culture items that are documented in Wikipedia, but its significance mostly predates the internet, making it hard to find things you can just go out and link to. (There's never been, AFAIK, a Rowrbrazzle web site, for instance, although there are contributors who have web sites that refer to it.) The "Wikifur" article is, presumably, a tertiary source, although it does its best to list its own primary and secondary sources. Is it inappropriate to at least link to the Wikifur page from this article, given that it's about as close as we're evidently gonna get to a web site "for" Rowrbrazzle? ChipotleCoyote 23:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A link might be viewed as OK. It is probably never going to work as a reference, as WikiFur does not require people to identify themselves, and does allow original research. The page is most likely accurate - it's been edited by a number of members of the group - but there's no authority to attribute it to. References work best when they are never changed after initial publication and are written by one person or a defined group of identifiable people who have easily-established credibility. GreenReaper 07:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Importance[edit]

Relative traffic to this article is low, but I'm keeping importance at mid due to its historical impact to the fandom. GreenReaper (talk) 15:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]