Do you really believe they'd say anything else?

Here on this website is the furry fandom. Most people have a fursona with bad colours and human haircuts. Of course they're gonna prefer it too, because they think it's okay, because they don't know any better. But anyone else notices the discrepancy of an animal with only scaly skin having a human-styled mass of cranial hair for no sensible reason in a semi-realistic concept. It's typically furry, but not exactly anthro.

Design is meaning and therefore everything that you do and everything that you do not means something. As you present your character here it looks like nothing else but a human with a raptor head, raptor feet, raptor tail and raptor skin, and every other element of the body is rattached to a human factory frame. If your goal was emphasized anthropomorphism this would be a more context-correct concept but as it is not it's simply not. It already looks too rigidly human without the hair.

• 'Hair' as in 'haircut' is entirely a human specificity. Every other animal has fur or feathers, but no 'hair'. There can be a concept of an alien with hair but that is not the case with straight up animal anthropomorphism. Hair only exists on the cranium. Fur reoccurs over parts or entirety of the body and has different structural qualities, and is more often part of a coat.
• 'Haircuts' are an anthropomorphic specificity. It is not a physiological component, but a cultural item relevant to sapience, style, self-consciousness, intelligence. Anything with enough intelligence to create and understand art can style its body's parts and elements for the sole purpose of style. That is why anthros, especially by the fact that they are implied intrinsically to be rapproached to a humanized conception of sapiency, can style their 'hair' into a 'haircut'. But if they are not human, they have no reason to do it like humans do, and especially given how they likely have no hair but feathers and fur, that would not react as such, therefore any sort of entirely-human haircut, if it is not done specifically to hint at a humanization of a subject, will be out of place.

In other words a fox with human hair and haircut misses the whole point of being a fox as opposed to a human; so would a dinosaur, especially how scaled creatures typically don't grow hair.

In all cases except extremely cartoony/comical or symbolically orientated (humanization) it just looks like a wig. Something just lazily put on.That is what the design means and so that is what the observer's brain reads.

The character here has no features whatsoever that would enable identification save for the out of place human haircut. Take that away and this is an entirely featureless raptor anthro visually. Your character becoming 'that one with hair'. Also bringing more attention to how nonsensical the item is.

But yeah I imagine everyone here is telling you it's just fine I mean look at how this place just screams 'expertise'

https://www.weasyl.com/