Talk:Yiff

The title of the BuzzFeed article quoted seems relatively straightforward as a reference. However, it appears to be a misinterpretation of what happened - a local newspaper hews more closely to the facts, quoting "inappropriate behaviour" and a Fox news report notes (around 1:55), that what was actually alleged was "simulated sex". This seems far more realistic, as it is something I have seen myself at furry events.

(In the end no evidence was provided to substantiate the specific claims made, but as mentioned in comments there volunteers were ultimately banned from using equipment and an agreement went unsigned.) GreenReaper (talk) 08:27, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Why not put that in the article?CycoMa (talk) 14:48, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm fine with doing that, if people agree with it. I wanted to explain it in more detail here because a) it required a bit more space than provided in an edit summary, and b) I was curious to see if there were any obvious problems with doing so first. GreenReaper (talk) 18:47, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

GreenReaper I don’t see anyone opposing it’s inclusion. About you just put it in and me and other users tweak it a bit.CycoMa (talk) 03:24, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@GreenReaper: are you still up for putting in what you wanted to add to this article?CycoMa (talk) 03:58, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

The way the incident is currently described sounds odd in-article. If we don't use the word "yiffing", it would seem it barely belongs in the article at all, in my opinion. Unless we're describing how a mainstream news outlet used yiffing in a headline, it doesn't seem like a necessary addition, but I'm hardly the arbiter of its removal. Squeeyote (talk) 20:10, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

There is already an article defining yiff on Wiktionary and any other information can already be gained from other articles like Furry Fandom (ex. the history and derogatory usage) I don't understand the necessity for this article. SharkFinnedGirl (talk) 19:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

It exists because sources exist, and the Furry Fandom article is a general overview, not an exhaustive rundown of every phenomenon in the subculture. In any case merging would be the appropriate route per WP:BEFORE, and would probably be rejected as WP:COATRACKing. Dronebogus (talk) 01:58, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm actually going to cry; please do. Ceruleanix (talk) 22:18, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Can you please remove the image? It is not appropriate and pornography images should not be shown on wikipedia. Procidic (talk) 19:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

See WP:DISC: Wikipedia contains many different images and videos ... some articles contain graphic depictions of violence, human anatomy, or sexual acts. and MOS:OMIMG. If there is an alternative image that contributes to or supports the content of the article better than the current one, you are free to replace it with that image. However, images broadly are not removed on the grounds of sexual nature alone where it is not gratuitous. ArkHyena (talk) 01:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

It seems that this article is specifically about the term "yiff", with almost no information on the topic itself (furry pornography). I believe there should be an article specifically on that theme instead of this specific slang. Skyshiftertalk 22:29, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

There is a picture depicting a "ponified" wikipe-tan in a suggestive pose. Considering the wikilink for "tan" explains that "tan" is a suffix for children is this picture really appropriate? SparklesTrainNerd (talk) 14:38, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Ringtail Raider can I get your opinion on this since you reverted the removal. SparklesTrainNerd (talk) 16:07, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

You can't add unsourced photos, I think, and the first photo is not sourced. Also, I'm removing the pedophillic image. (Talk) PHLOGISTON ENTHUSIAST 23:35, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

@Phlogiston Enthusiast, what do you mean by unsourced? The uploader of the file on Commons labeled it as "own work". That makes the uploader the source. Chess enjoyer (talk) 20:43, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

That's my bad, I didn't see it. (Talk) PHLOGISTON ENTHUSIAST 20:44, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Also, are you sure that Wikipe-tan is a minor? the information page doesn't seem to say so (unless I missed it). Chess enjoyer (talk) 20:46, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

-tan is being used as a suffix for children, as with other mascots ending in the same thing at moe anthropomorphism. (Talk) PHLOGISTON ENTHUSIAST 20:48, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Read the infobox of the first image on the article. (Talk) PHLOGISTON ENTHUSIAST 20:49, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

The one on moe anthropomorphism? (I responded at the FFD, by the way) Chess enjoyer (talk) 20:57, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Came over here from the fleeting thread at ANI, and sorry, I'm not sold. Your interpretation of the image as that of a child (or your characterization of -tan as meaning a child) is your personal take on the matter, and that's scarcely authoritative or decisive. Ravenswing 21:03, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm also not sure it would matter even if she is. See the lead image of lolicon. Chess enjoyer (talk) 21:04, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment It seems that a similar concern arose in July 2007 when a suggestive image of Wikipe-tan was proposed for the lolicon article. Wikipedia:Wikipe-tan#Use and mentions. In this case, the image is exotic fan art depicting Wikipe-tan as a pony, thus keeping the ponified version of the mascot as the primary image seems reasonable. Issac I Navarro (talk) 05:04, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Why have several revisions of this article been hidden by @Chaotic Enby with no reason given? Ringtail Raider (talk) 21:27, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Presumably due to the concerns raised above that this image may be a sexualized depiction of a minor. Toadspike [Talk] 21:34, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Aside from the discussions currently leaning towards disagreeing and the questionable behavior of the person who started this – if that's the concern here; one. why wasn't a reason given; and two, why is the image okay on Clop (erotic fan art)? Ringtail Raider (talk) 21:40, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

1/ Because WP:RD4 shouldn't be written in the log explicitly (although I could've come up with some circumvolution, or simply used WP:RD3), and 2/ because I didn't notice it was there. Waiting for oversighter feedback before doing anything more. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:53, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Aside from the age concerns, I removed the image from this article as it did not fit alongside the rather short text; on my screen it overflowed into the References section. The age issue should probably be discussed at Commons:Deletion requests/File:MLP clop fanart of a pony version of Wikipedia.png, where, FWIW, the creator has stated that the subject is an adult . Toadspike [Talk] 21:58, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Fixed link: c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:MLP clop fanart of a pony version of Wikipedia.png. In light of this new information, I will undelete the relevant revisions. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:59, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

I have already asked Chaotic Enby, but since you started this thread I invited them to answer my question here. Chess enjoyer (talk) 21:46, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

WP:RD4, which, well, I'm not supposed to put in the log explicitly. I forwarded the matter to a couple of oversighters and am waiting for a response – I was actually about to send a mail to the Oversight mailing list now. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:52, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

The claim that Wikipe-tan is a minor (how I assume RD4 ties into this) is dubious at best (and see Toadspike's comment comment above). I'm also not sure if fictional characters fall under that. As I said in the above thread, see the lead image of lolicon. Chess enjoyer (talk) 21:59, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Undeleting following clarification. In retrospect, an actually illegal image would have also fallen under WP:RD3 and I should have clarified this. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:02, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for ongoing/updated handling of this. RD is often sensitive to avoid drawing attention also but shoot-first. I see no substantial problem in the initial action or the eventual outcome, unless COM:DR decides it's actually illegal. DMacks (talk) 01:03, 18 March 2026 (UTC)