Talk:Cat/Archive 2

Archived
This talk page was far too long at >100K. I don't think there were any open discussions, so I've moved all the content into the archive linked to above. Psychofox 00:53, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

Sections removed
I want to know why DreamGuy removed a lot of sections and subsections in the article. What's the purpose with this? EliasAlucard|Talk 14:24, 16 Aug, 2005 (UTC)
 * He removed the headings only, as the TOC was getting insane. --Kiand 12:26, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Excuse me for asking, but what's TOC? EliasAlucard|Talk 14:29, 16 Aug, 2005 (UTC)
 * Table Of Contents. --Kiand 12:33, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * As discussed on the candidates for featured article page... and in the future, if you reject one thing being not the way you like it, undo that one thing, not all of the rest of the edits. You blind reverted a whole slew of changes for no reason. DreamGuy 12:34, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * DreamGuy, I reject your entire edits of removing the sections, nothing you edit is the way I like it, not just fixing that link you screwed up. In my opinion, the TOC wasn't insane. In the future, don't be so presumptuous. That's my advice to you. Anyway, I've got no intentions into getting into another pointless revert war with you. EliasAlucard|Talk 14:47, 16 Aug, 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, we've already determined from your comments (and block) elsewhere that you hate any edit I do anywhere because you hate me. Don't blind revert things. DreamGuy 12:58, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Is that the best retort could respond with? Me getting blocked was all your fault, and you know it. You've been blocked three times, so that makes you even worse. Anyway, this article is hardly the right place to discuss issues from the past. Don't expect any respond from me anymore, and don't adress me in your messages. EliasAlucard|Talk 17:04, 16 Aug, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oi... DreamGuy, you piss ME off and I have no personal bias against you; Hell, for making an attempt at getting rid of two of Enviroknot's sock puppets would make me biased towards you. It's nice that you actually read the article without insulting everyone involved by saying they probably made it worse than it originally was. -- A Link to the Past 13:34, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * You might try reading and following Civility. And I'm having problems following the Enviroknot thing -- are you saying you hold a grudge against me because I helped admins identify and block three (not two) sockpuppets of someone who has been blocked from this site for a year for extreme vandalism, personal attacks, edit warring under multiple identities, and whatever else they had on him? And I didn't insult everyone involved, I just said that in my opinion the article as it was was in poorer shape than a week ago... I am entitled to my own opinion, and you should not be so extremely offended if my opinion doesn't match your own. Also, I removed the personal attacks you put on my talk page, per the No personal attacks policy. Now could you calm down and get back to the topic? DreamGuy 14:12, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * No, I'm pissed at you for claiming that we were cheating. So, what, we're doing the horrible act of not counting a single vote that is in our favor?
 * And, it's not a personal attack, it's a well thought-out message on your claim that it was probably a bigger mess. Either you're extremely inconfident with your opinion, or you never even read the article in the first place. The only reason you're attacking the article is because you don't want to support it. -- A Link to the Past 14:30, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

Human attitudes
This sentence: "Some people (called cat lovers) go to great lengths to pamper their cats, sometimes treating them almost as if they were children." strikes me as rather silly and unencyclopaedic. Apart from the fact that there are many ways to treat a child, defining cat-human relationships in terms of inter-human relationships is rather futile. Cats do get similar treatment to a child - names, free food and board, etc. - but the relationship is based on mutual benefit rather than a desire to spread one's genes. I haven't attempted to edit it, since the section provides a list of human attitudes and deleting the sentence wouldn't cover the domestic human/cat relationship sufficiently in comparison to the paragraphs on negative attitudes and farm cats. 194.216.55.225

Toilet Training
Is anybody else uncomfortable with the picture of the toilet trained cat? I just don't think that in an encyclopedic article about Cats, of the five or six pictures which are there, one needs to be of a cat sitting on a toilet. I'm fairly convinced it is not a photoshopped picture, but it really lowers the tone.

If I removed it, would there be many objections? (unsigned, but by User:84.9.233.161)


 * Remove It does seem to me, that if anything, the picture should be of a normal Cat using a normal litter tray. Psychofox 01:41, August 12, 2005 (UTC)


 * Agree to remove it. In fact I did (should enough people wnat it there with good reasons it is easy enough to put back). It does seem out of place, but I'm more concerned about the pic being a bit out of focus (enough that you can still see it at the smaller size). This page sure attracts people hoping to put up pics of their own cats, while I like the professional quality images that are on there. DreamGuy 02:16, August 12, 2005 (UTC)


 * Good job DreamGuy. After the farce a while back with the 'smiling' cat, I didn't have the courage to remove this image myself. :-) Psychofox 00:36, August 16, 2005 (UTC)


 * What got me interested in the subject was the statement that indoor cats must be provided with a litterbox. With this in mind, I added the text describing the use of a litterbox by indoor cats, and the less-than-perfect photo, which has now been deleted.


 * Consider that on the subject of hygiene, a picture is worth a thousand words, especially if many people are unaware of the ease with which cats adapt to toilets. It illustrates the fastidious nature of the cat, and a litter box, known to many people as smelly and unsightly, would not provide nearly the value as a photo of a hygenic, toilet-trained cat.


 * User:84.9.233.161 seemed to object to the photo based on it being somehow undignified. I suppose this user would not want to show a picture of a baby having his or her diaper changed in the article about babies.  Really, aren't these salient features of hygiene when it comes to every species?   And User:DreamGuy, would you be happier with a sharp focus, higher-resolution one? I have one that's better.  Reward 06:25, 17 August 2005 (UTC)


 * With regard to your analogy, I personally would be perfectly happy with a picture of a baby getting its nappy changed because most of the time, a baby is either eating, sleeping, crying or having it's nappy changed.... :-) In this case, a picture of the use of an actual litter tray would be more appropriate. Just because a vanishingly small proportion of cats have been trained to use a toilet does not mean that if one had to pick seven or so images to represent the Cat concept (this is an encyclopedia), a picture of a Cat using a toilet should be one of them.  User:Reward, if you really want to follow through with this.  Perhaps you would like to start a side article, such as Cat hygiene, on the topic? Some people have already mentioned that the Cat article is too long... Psychofox 20:47, August 18, 2005 (UTC)


 * Psychofox, that's a possibility, but I don't think the Cat hygiene article would more than a very short (and very boring) stub. Please see my vote below.  Also, I'm not sure that removing four short sentences and a 150px thumbnail would make the article much shorter.  Reward 08:24, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

I have noticed that a new picture has been added. I don't want to turn this into a revert war. So we should proceed with a vote, in a week or so, we'll see what the consensus is. This a vote for whether it is necessary to have an image of a Cat on the toilet in the main Cat article.

Votes:


 * Delete I think I've made my position clear. Psychofox 21:02, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - How many toilet-trained cats are out there? I know of none (except those seen in the movies) I'm sure there are some, but pictures of such minority do not deserve to be included in the main article. If we are to oblige to list all those such photos, what about a picture of a cat cooked in ginger sauce? I am serious. There are quite a few cat cuisines in southern China, where it is considered to be a delicacy. 202.156.2.75 16:41, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The image makes me uncomfortable, and it's so odd. :S - A Link to the Past 19:40, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think it would be better as a separate article instead of in the main one. This article is already quite long as it is, and some of these side issues should probably be split off. DreamGuy 23:11, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I didn't know that it was possible to toilet train cats, and now when I saw it in this article, I'm damn sure going to try. I found this information useful, therefore I want it to stay. EliasAlucard|Talk 01:56, 20 Aug, 2005 (UTC)
 * Seriously??? I find the thought of sharing a toilet with an animal to be distinctly unhygenic. Psychofox 02:33, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * What would you prefer? A 24/7 stinking litterbox, or your cat(s) taking a shit in the toilet like any ordinary human? I mean, if hygiene is of your concern, then cats shouldn't be a problem, because they're really clean. I just wish I knew how, because I wouldn't have to waste a lot of good money on the litter. Is there some kind of manual around? EliasAlucard|Talk 13:43, 21 Aug, 2005 (UTC)
 * Why don't you just get rid of your toilet and use your cat's litter tray? Alternatively, if you follow the links in the article, there is apparently a book on the subect. Psychofox 15:23, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Depends on the animal, Psychofox! Sharing a toilet with a two-legged animal, a male of the species who's had a few beers, would be much more unhygienic. :) Cats, in my experience, are neater than most children and many adults. Reward 08:24, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I am happy with my body's ability to cope with most pathogens from the human digestive tract. Psychofox 15:23, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Surely most of us are happy with that too, Psychofox. But, your implication -- that somehow you'd be facing some pathogens from cats, entering your digestive tract? You're making quite a leap of logic.  First, you're assuming that cats are carriers of disease and represent a danger to good health.  Then, you're assuming that because a cat uses a toilet, you'd somehow ingest food- or water-borne pathogens.  This simply would not happen to anyone, unless they are placing food inside the toilet bowl before eating it, or drinking toilet water.  Unlikely, right?  Avoiding pathogens is not too difficult, and has nothing to do with cats using toilets:  wash your hands well before eating or preparing food, drink pure water, make sure your food is well-cooked, and that raw foods are prepared with sanitary utensils.  Reward 19:51, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think this is a very interesting picture. I knew that some cats could be toilet trained, but I've never seen such a high quality picture demonstrating it. I think it's an excellent odour reducing solution to the litter box, but I wonder if toilet training a cat could have bad consequences, such as when they get older and have trouble jumping and balancing.--AirIntake 05:30, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
 * We used a small step to help older cats jump up, and didn't have problems. A few times, we had to use a litterbox for a sick or near-death cat. Otherwise, it's an elegant solution to an otherwise messy situation.  Reward 20:06, 20 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. I certainly had not intended my edits, consisting of adding the image and several sentences, to be sensational or to disturb anyone.  Instead, believed I had found a concise way to convey something not everyone knows about cats: their ability to be easily trained (while illustrating something relevant to cat hygiene).


 * The unique value of the image is its ability to pique the interest of the reader, and to stimulate a desire to learn more about cats. I realize that many people may have deeply-held feelings about cats.  Growing up with toilet-using cats, I found it fascinating to hear the opinions of those unfamilar with cats or with the idea of their training.  Unfortunately, often with those comments came the perjorative terms:  messy, smelly, untrainable, lazy, mean, stupid.


 * I believe our mission goes beyond conveying that which is common knowledge, or sterotype, as the case might be; the reader should want to know more. A good article might involve nudging a few preconceptions, but ultimately, the knowledge gained should worth that brief moment of discomfort. Reward 06:12, 20 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I think it is sensationlistic. But to be honest, I'm giving up on this article. Good luck in future folks. Psychofox 15:23, August 20, 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. I agree with DreamGuy that it does seem (a little) out of place. However, I think it's valuable, encyclopedic, and pertinent to the article. It seems like a major part of the objections is that the photo isn't very good or looks weird/out of place. Maybe Reward can take a better photograph? I can't figure out how to put in words what would make it better, though. ~⌈Markaci⌋ 2005-08-21 T 06:06:47 Z


 * Thanks, Mar. I agree with you that the previous photo needed some help (due to the flash); the new one is a photo taken in natural light.  Reward 07:03, 24 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. appropriate, and not at all gross. informative. i'm glad it's here. SaltyPig 02:32, 30 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. Quite a number of cats are actually toilet trained, and I agree with Mar on all counts, especially given the new, more professional-looking photo. A. J. Luxton 11:37, 5 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. I dont think it is out of place, it is offering an incredibly useful, time-saving, money saving & practical suggestion to anyone who is prepared to put in the training time.


 * Keep. Uhmmm.  No mention of whether cat can flush.  Ariele 18:59, 20 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. First time I saw a cat using the toilet (except for the scene in Meet the Parents). --Andylkl (talk) 09:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Cat giving birth pictures
I got some great pictures of my cat giving birth. Would anyone oppose if I uploaded them and added them in this article, or the kitten article, or perhaps we can start a new article called Cat birth or something similar? I think a section or article about this would be cool. It's quite interesting to know exactly how many kittens a cat can give birth to, and other knowledge and trivia about that certain part of cats. Give me some feedback. EliasAlucard|Talk 09:53, 21 Aug, 2005 (UTC)
 * Excellent idea, EliasAlucard! I've been looking at kitten.  I will move the existing photo down a bit in the section, and to the left.  You could place the birth photo on the right side, so the section text can begin flush left, for better flow. Thanks for adding something interesting and useful to the article.  Reward 05:44, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
 * All right, I'll upload them all when I've got time, and you guys can decide which ones you want. EliasAlucard|Talk 15:08, 22 Aug, 2005 (UTC)

Declawing, the law, and English
It's good to make the addition about laws against declawing. However at a minimum, the label of the link in the footnote should be in English, and say the web site is in German(Italian/French). Ideally, an English language translated source should also be found. Some countries (apparently) have total bans (no exceptions), while others ban it in virtually all cases, but notably allow it in some extreme cases. That's a fairly signficant distinction, since some cats are euthanized if they can't be declawed. A quick Google search gave contradicting information on the whole issue of what the laws say (an English site said there were exceptions in Swiss+Germany, but a Google translation of the German language Swiss link gave no exceptions). --rob 12:54, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't know of any on-line (or other) official English translations of the Swiss law. The label gives the official (German) title, feel free to translate it. You write "some cats are euthanized if they can't be declawed". Never heard of that (living in Switzerland), but then, de-clawing is outlawed here, so I'm most definitely not an expert on the common practices in other countries. (Though I must say I find the idea of de-clawing a cat rather horrendous.) We'd also need a reference for Germany (I don't know German law well enough to find it, or the cases), and we should check what other European countries' laws have to say on the issue. Lupo 13:18, August 22, 2005 (UTC)


 * If it's not obvious (from prior comments), I don't speak German. I'm not translating something I don't understand.  I'm also not relying on machine translation.  This is an English-language site (there's a separate German language site available).  If the label on the link is not translated (remaining only German), I will simply delete it, as it serves no purpose to English readers.    --rob 13:48, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * My, are you a polite one. I am well aware that this is the English WP, thank you. The reference does serve a purpose: it references a fact that needs a reference since the fact is apparently not well known to English-speaking people. I would have provided an English title for the link if I knew how to translate it, but alas I don't. Do you speak French? (I'm asking since you state on your user page that your grandparents lived in Québec...) If so, maybe you can understand the French version of that Swiss law and help translating its title? Or maybe we can even find an English web site that would give an overview of different countries' respective laws... Lupo 14:34, August 22, 2005 (UTC)


 * Never mind, I have found an English translation of the law, will update the reference. Lupo 15:06, August 22, 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks. As I only speak English, this makes things much better.  One point added:  the treaty mentioned, allows non-medically necessary declawing when it benefits the pet.  I put a mini-quote to cover it.  --rob 16:14, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * And I turned it into a full quote. It's important to state that only a vet may decide what benefits the pet. The owner gets no say (at least, in theory). Lupo 06:45, August 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * Good point, and good change. You might wish to also include that in onychectomy for the same reasons.  --rob 06:52, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

I added the "Main article: onychectomy" to the article since it's a clearer way of telling people to go to the main article, both to read, and to put any substantial new details in. I think there's more room for growth in onychectomy than there is in this article. --rob 08:01, 24 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I think this declawing paragraph should be shortened considerably, and its placement in the "Hygiene" section is inappropriate. How about replacing the whole thing with the following:


 * Surgical removal of a cat's claws (declawing), an operation called onychectomy that has to be carried out under anesthesia, is highly controversial and practiced primarily in the U.S. In Europe, the practice is uncommon and is prohibited by law in many countries under the terms of the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals, unless "a veterinarian considers [such] non-curative procedures necessary either for veterinary medical reasons or for the benefit of any particular animal".[12] In Switzerland, the practice is illegal in all cases.[11]


 * There's no need to repeat pro and contra arguments in this article. If someone feels the need to do that, onychectomy is the place. A "main article" link isn't needed; we usually use them for stand-alone sections that are a summary of the linked article. Introducing one for these isolated paragraphs just screws up the flow (and the formatting).


 * Note: A source for my statement in the above proposal that declawing was practised primarily in the U.S. would be good. I don't have one (yet), the statement reflects the impression I get from personal (European) experience, Talk:Onychectomy, and some not-too-serious Googling. Even better if we could find out what percentage of (owned) cats are declawed.
 * External sources for the percentage seem hard to find, I only came up with 31% (reader survey) and 5 - 20% in California. Lupo 11:06, August 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh, and someone should fix the reference numbering. It's off by one. (The link on [11] goes to the ref numbered 10.) Lupo 10:43, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Nine lives
Where should I put about cats supposedly having nine lives? I can't find anywhere suitable in the article, and I don't want to start a Trivia section with only one note. Thelb4 20:29, 23 August 2005 (UTC)


 * History and mythology. It would fit right in with some of the information already provided. There is a Wiki for Nine_lives already, but in connection with cats, it mentions only that the number nine is supposed to be lucky.  If you can cite some theories for the origin of this myth, and why the number nine is lucky, that would be interesting.  If you are successful, link the Nine_lives page back to Cat.  Thanks.  Reward 07:52, 24 August 2005 (UTC)


 * There is not a wiki for Nine_lives.Psychofox 04:33, August 25, 2005 (UTC)


 * Right; I meant the disambiguation page for Nine_Lives. Reward 08:58, 28 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh, I know the answer to that one, along with the appropriate folklore books to source it, though it's not really that nine is lucky. When I have a free minute I can do that. DreamGuy 00:44, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

pictures
I would suggest moving all the pics to the right, so they don't impede readers who wish to ignore them. I think there's no harm in having many pics (like the last one deleted by somebody). The great thing about an article like this, is it's easier to get free-license images, and I say we should take full advantage of the fact, as long as in doesn't interupt the text (which left-justified images do). --rob 23:59, 24 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I would disagreee on all points there. We discussed this in the past and decided to simply take a limited number of good ones that illustrate the article, not jsut a bunch of them because we can. This article is not Buncha blurry photos Wikipedians took of their cats, it's trying to be an encyclopedia article, and we should aim for quality, not quantity (and that goes for all articles in general, both with photos and text). I also think that having images on the left is a good thing, to add balance to the page and so that images that are strongly facing the right don't look like they are looking off the side of the screen, as that's a layout no-no. DreamGuy 00:39, August 25, 2005 (UTC)


 * Well most good wiki articles use the convention of photos on the right. Having alternating sides is not balance, its inconsistant and distracting.  If you want to be encyclopedic, forcing a reader to see a cat on a toilet while reading, on the grounds the "cat is facing right" makes the arguement laughable.  I'm fine with the photo, but it shouldn't be "pushed" on me, which it is, when it's on the left.  I don't recall asking for "blurry" photos either.  I'm simply saying we have more freedom to include pics, than in other cases, where "fair use" images are relied on.  Anyway, if I'm alone one this, I won't act unilaterly.  --rob 00:57, 25 August 2005 (UTC)


 * rob, nobody is 'forcing you' to look at the picture. You don't have to look at Wikipedia at all if you don't like it. The picture is not intrusive and doesn't take up a large amount of screen space (unless you're running at 640x480, which you shouldn't be). If you don't like that cats can use toilets and find the image offensive, that's just too bad, because it's valuable information about cat behaviour and training.--AirIntake 15:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi rob, I'm afraid I'm with DreamGuy. Images which are facing right should be on the left. Its a basic style guideline in design in general, never mind wikipedia.  See Manual_of_Style.  With regard to the selection of photos on show, less is more in my book.  If you want a repository of Cat photos, see Images_of_cats or . Psychofox 04:29, August 25, 2005 (UTC)


 * Ok, it's official, those wanting the cat on the toilet to be facing the text win. Case-closed, thread over.  --rob 04:38, 25 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm with DreamGuy on this one. The article would look stupid with all the pictures on the right. Please, somebody check in a print encyclopedia, I just checked the 'World Book' print version I have (which isn't the newest version though). Pictures are placed on both sides, depending on where they look best, and are different sizes. There is no right side/left side convention in encyclopedias that I have ever seen.--AirIntake 15:41, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Even though wiki used WIDTH/HEIGHT tags, which allow proper rending of text around images, it still looks bad to have big blank rectangles (with just a caption) appearing as the images load for some people (which is less noticable when images are on the right). Also you are confusing "what the major commercial encyclopedias do to make their works have mass commercial appeal" with being enyclopedic.  Of course, the alternating approach you favor is appealing to the eye, especially to somebody who likes seeing pretty pictures of cats.  I'm sure you and others enjoy looking at the pics in these visually appealing glossy works.  But, on the web, some don't wish to look at them (especially at a return visit).  Others, as said, can't look at them until they finish loading.  Also, just a reminder, I never once advocated putting a bunch of "blurry" pics in the article, as suggested.  Anyway, I'm leaving the pretty, yet impractical visual style the way you want it. --rob 22:44, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah, but you see, the people who design things professional so that they can be read easily also choose to have images on the left, so it's odd for someone to be arguing against them based upn the idea that they are impractical. They are quite practical. DreamGuy 16:48, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

I see the catnap one got removed. I didn't mind that one so much as it was illustrating a section talking about catnaps and was fairly decent for an amateur photo. DreamGuy 16:48, August 27, 2005 (UTC) And the Abyssinian cat one that got added in it's place is nice, but it has nothing to do with that section. I could see that more in the breeds section. And more the same size as the ones on that side. DreamGuy 18:43, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

wow! what a great article
learned plenty. thanks to everybody who contributed. very well done. SaltyPig 02:34, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

purring information incorrect.
Communication, 3rd paragraph, it states that "Since the purr is not a vocal sound but is directly produced in the lungs..."

This is incorrect. The exact mechanism for purring is unknown. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purr


 * Clarified to better reflect the Wiki on purring http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purr (and forgot to add my sig to this) muuttaa 03:07, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Help Topic
This discussion took place at the help desk:

cat vertebrae
The article on Cat incorrectly states that cats are more flexible than humans because they have more vertebra [60 vs. 34, if I recall correctly]. Cats only have more vertebrae if you count their tails; from skull to pelvis they have exactly the same number of vertebrae as humans [and indeed, all mammals].


 * I took that out. Thank you for the catch. I hope you soon feel comfortable adding/editing content in articles yourself but a notice here is welcome too. Thanks again. Qaz 19:26, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Johntex 22:30, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Urban Legend Reference
As per the recognized experts online: http://www.snopes.com/info/glossary.asp, I stand by my edit of the fact that an urban legend is by definition untrue. Here is Snopes' definition:


 * Urban legends are a specific class of legend, differentiated from "ordinary" legends by their being provided and believed as accounts of actual incidents that befell or were witnessed by someone the teller almost knows (e.g., his sister's hairdresser's mechanic). These tales are told as true, local, and recent occurrences, and often contain names of places or entities located within the teller's neighborhood or surrounding region.


 * Urban legends are narratives which put our fears and concerns into the form of stories or are tales which we use to confirm the rightness of our world view. As cautionary tales they warn us against engaging in risky behaviors by pointing out what has supposedly happened to others who did what we might be tempted to try. Other legends confirm our belief that it's a big, bad world out there, one awash with crazed killers, lurking terrorists, unscrupulous companies out to make a buck at any cost, and a government that doesn't give a damn.


 * Folks commonly equate 'urban legend' with 'false' (i.e., "Oh, that's an urban legend!"). Though the vast majority of such tales are pure invention, a handful do turn out to be based on real incidents, and whether or not something actually happened has no bearing on its status as an urban legend. What lifts true tales of this type out of the world of news and into the genre of contemporary lore is the blurring of details and multiplicity of claims that the events happened locally, alterations which take place as the stories are passed through countless hands. Though there might indeed have been an original actual event, it clearly did not happen to as many people or in as many places as the various recountings of it would have us believe.

I have bolded the relevant part. If a true detail is blurred it is no longer true. Being based upon a truth does not make something true. This may seem a semiotic nitpick, but nonetheless it is recognized. An urban legend can be based upon a truth, but it, itself, is not. I will restore my edit, and also add this argument to the urban legend entry. Iago Dali 18:52, 2 September 2005 (UTC)


 * On http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Urban_legend I have cited this same passage. One of the things I've noticed is that many definitions tend to get a fuzzy postmodern treatment. Even this definition on Snopes is terribly wishy-washy. I think Wikipedia should do better.Iago Dali 19:10, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

I am sorry, but everyone in the field of urban legends knows that they can be true or false... the Snopes pages explicitly list the ULs as true or false... true ones are still urban legends and still listed there as urban legends. That's the whole point. The bolded part above you are completely misreading. Please check ANY scholarly book on the topic of urban legends or legends (Jan Brunvand, etc.) or stop in the urban legends newsgroups. Claims that urban legends are by definition false are simply wrong. I have undid the change here and on the urban legend article. If you would like to dispute this, I suggest that you try to find a real source instead of using your interpretation of an ambiguously worded section to come to a conclusion completely opposite of what is clearly spelled out on every page by the existence of the true/false label. DreamGuy 20:25, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

purr when distressed
perhaps too skeptical, but is the speculation re why cats sometimes purr when distressed appropriate for wikipedia? even if it is, the recent addition of the word "paroxysmal" seems a little vocabulary-shiny to me in context, along with perhaps a healthy dose of original research / POV for the sentence. opinions? SaltyPig 20:35, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

It was me that added it in originally (reason for purring when distressed). Though I never saw the "paroxysmal" word. Basically, I believe how it is at the moment could mislead someone because it says some cats purr when distressed as if to say that is it a direct reaction. It is generally accepted (I read lots of cat books. Shall I get a reference?) that cats purr when distressed to calm themselves. An example is removing a thorn from my cat's paw...it took so long and the cat was in a lot of pain and eventually it began to purr. Because I do believe it adds more to why. - Chris 17:25 20th Nov 2005

vision
given the current impossibility (acknowledged by scientists) of measuring the vision of animals with precision (especially with meaningful comparability between species), the new assertions are too definite. beyond this general problem, when differences between snellen fractions are expressed in the form ".xx of a [species]", it connotes inappropriate mathematical accuracy to what are already vague measurements. ratio form aside, direct vision comparisons among different species are often impossible, so the current version is misleading. stressing even raw snellen fractions for "visual acuity" doesn't inform readers that a species assigned a worse value could potentially see certain things (especially those important for its survival) better under the same light.

none of us really knows what an animals sees. stating in absolute language that a cat sees colors "only as fuzzy pastels"... i think it's pushing it. tests may indicate that, yes, but wikipedia should state it with such caveats, or fuzz up the language so that caveats aren't necessary. barring that, the methods used to obtain the parameters should at least be described, even if only briefly.

on a side note, the tapetum link needs to be dab'd, or the subject avoided until its appearance in the next paragraph. if nobody wants to edit this section, i'll take a stab later. SaltyPig 00:35, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Sentences on Vision

 * Cats have excellent vision, which aids them in hunting;
 * Contrary to popular belief a cat's vision is inferior, in most cases, to that of humans and to other domestic animals

Is it just me, or do these sentences appear to contradict each other? While the article does go on to say that cats have excellent night vision, it might be a good idea to revise the sentence in the introduction. --Bletch 01:34, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Nyaoooooo =^_^=

A cats tapetum also contains large amounts of riboflavin, which coincidentally flouresces at a very close approximation to the activation threshold of the rhodopsin in its eyes, thus allowing it not only to get a second chance to see light, but also converting it into a more usable form.

My biomed prof [a neuroscientist] told us that most higher order animals' eyes work basically the same way; the primary difference (in normal daylight) is in the number of neurons devoted to visual processing. An eagle has the best sight because it has more neurons devoted to it than any other animal. &rarr;Raul654 06:35, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Article structure
The longer I look at this article, the more I feel that some serious restructuring is in order. That "characteristics" section is one big mess! How about taking it apart: a true "physical characteristics" section (also describing its senses), a "behavior" section, and a section dedicated to problems that may occur if a cat lives in the same space as humans, and ways to deal with them? That last section should become a sub-section of "domestication", even. Lupo 07:55, September 5, 2005 (UTC)


 * i just saw this article for the first time the other day, and that was one of my favorite sections! anyway, i'd like to see you try a reorg if you feel strongly about it and want to do it. maybe you can throw in some sound files of Reward's cat using the toilet? ; ) SaltyPig 22:01, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Just to say
Just to say, to everyone who worked on making this article an FA: well done! I am a sworn cat hater, but this is really a wonderful article. Impressive work by all of you, and thank you, from someone who appreciates a good article even on a topic far from his heart... Soo 14:27, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Freya's Cats
Does anyone know of a source for Freya's casts being callled "Bygul and Trygul"? This was mentioned in the mythology section, but I've never encountered their names in actual study except as something someone said they believed, but could not prove. ---Mr. Nexx 15:48, September 5, 2005 (UTC)


 * Ugh, I can't believed I missed that... Those names come from modern fiction, not original beliefs... and, heck, I've seen arguments that the animals in question weren;t even cats as we think of them and that's just how they were translated. I am definitely removing that reference. DreamGuy 21:06, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Mutations
There needs to be a section discussing some of the more interesting mutations found in cats, such as polydactyls, fold ears, short legs (sometimes called munchkin), and perhaps hairless cats.
 * Agree. Also Manx cats.

Gesturing
The article states that cats gesture... how? An example is needed. -Timvasquez 16:26, 5 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Will this do? ;)

Defacement
I don't know how to solve this problem myself, as I went to edit the page and it was displaying the normal expected text - someone defaced the text under the 'Senses' block in such a manner that it can't be fixed via normal means. I don't feel comfortable enough with the 'Undo' type feature to try and roll back the page to a point where these defacements aren't there, I don't want to write over someone's legitimate work - could someone more familiar than I am with Wikipedia somehow fix this? it's extremely distracting. Thanks! Kobayashihikaru 18:27, 5 September 2005 (UTC)


 * what defacements are you talking about? can you be more specific? BTW, i moved your comment to the bottom, per normal wikipedia talk page procedure. when posting a new section, you can use the "post a comment" button and it'll take care of that, while also protecting you from edit conflicts. SaltyPig 21:29, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Read this,

Characteristics [edit] Physical

Please contact someone about this so that they can ban that person's IP address.--Zhukeeper 08:43, 6 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Zhukeeper, you'd better get used to it! that's just run o' the mill vandalism (funnier than normal, but regular in its need for removal). i just checked your contribution history to see if quoting vulgar vandalism on talk pages was your thing, and it seems it's not. if you're interested in what can be done to put a little slowdown on vandals, post a comment on my talk page. i encourage you to wipe out this comment and yours, so the out-of-work comic doesn't have a monument to his joke. thanks for mentioning it though. soon you'll not be surprised by any of it, though you might chuckle now and then. SaltyPig 09:01, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Okay, sure, I'll erase the quote. Sorry about it, the quote is quite funny, but I didn't posted the quote up in the discussion page to make viewers laugh. I copy-pasted it because the guy on top of the quote asked for the location of the defacement. I've just read the articles and discussion pages from wikipedia so far, and it is the first time I've seen vandalism in Wiki.. I've erased the quote....

the big door decision
this must have been discussed plenty of other places, but would it be worth throwing in something about how cats pester owners to let them block the door while deciding if "in" or "out" is the correct plan? would that be too trivial? is it just cats? anybody figured out the best way to train out this habit? i generally allow a few seconds, then shut the door for that try. problem is our cat doesn't get the logic there. SaltyPig 19:42, 6 September 2005 (UTC)


 * What are you talking about? Try installing a cat flap! Lupo 06:41, September 7, 2005 (UTC)


 * sounds like you knew what i was talking about. SaltyPig 09:38, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Not really :-) I had installed the cat flap two days before I got my first cat. Lupo 09:45, September 7, 2005 (UTC)


 * installing a cat door could require the temporary removal of my aluminum foil deflector beanie during the construction phase. nice try, Lupo, but "nad g'na duit!"


 * There goes my cover. He knows me! You know, you're supposed to install the flap in the door, not in your head! Conall 11:55, September 7, 2005 (UTC)


 * ahhhh! well, it looks like i was out to lunch thinking this might be a big segment of the cat map. if you're okay with it, please zap this section from the talk page. thanks for the replies. SaltyPig 12:47, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Cat Question:
I have a question. My cat is really hyper at some times. Normally he sleeps or explores & eats. But occasionally if you just walk up to him he runs off wildly. Other times he stalks me & my family & sometimes does a drive-by scratching, (scratches then runs away). My question is: Is this kind of behaviour normal? Could you please leave an answer on here or my talk page? Thnx, Spawn Man 06:55, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Take your time....(hint of sarcassism)...

No, your cat is insane and plots your death (covered in sarcasm). DreamGuy 18:07, September 9, 2005 (UTC)


 * Argghhhhh.... The Horror!!!!!!!!!!! *Faints* Spawn Man 06:05, 10 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Just don't give him the car keys. Ariele 17:07, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

What type of cat is it? Long hair can attract grass seeds that may be painful causing wildness. Just testing this out. Don't know how to link? Australia 21/9/05


 * He's short haired. But we've kept him inside all the time so far... Spawn Man 04:00, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Spoken Audio
Does the audio work for anyone? When I click it asks me to upload a file, and that no spoken audio for this article exits, yet the text on the page says it was created. Any ideas? I also noticed that the audio was listed as an .ogg. If possible, wouldn't a .mp3 be more universal? WMP doesn't play .oggs by default so an ogg could confuse some people --AirIntake 17:40, 9 September 2005 (UTC) Take a cat nap!

I can't use .ogg files in a ny of my music players: WMP, Real Player, ITunes... I think that an mp3 would be good too. It's... Thelb4! 15:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Vandals
Bad. The contributions made by the vandals demonstrate once again that Cat's have been a subject of insult, and subjected to tyranny and persecution in the modern age. Ancient Egyptians treated cats as sacred animals. Today, it would seem only cat lovers offer cats that status. Being a former dog owner for many years, I've discovered cats are more complex and require more care, respect, and understanding. Cats are very dignified beings.

This article does seem to get quite a lot of vandalism for some reason. Not sure why though. Pschemp 20:41, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Diseases
Great article. Are there plans to expand subject to include diseases specific to cats? Examples:
 * hyperthyroidism in cats
 * Chronic Renal Failure In Cats and
 * Feline Diabetes
 * Feline leukemia
 * Feline Hepatic Lipidosis
 * Feline Arthritis

etc....

This article is quite large.....maybe a cat diseases article would be more appropriate.Pschemp 20:41, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

IQ
I removed this edit, while I don't have a problem with discussing the intelligence of cats, I object to this wording. IQ tests can actually only be given to humans. A comparison might be more appropriate but until this is restated, I don't think it belongs in the article.Pschemp 20:41, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

"Cat's have a higher I.Q. than most other animals. Cats have an I.Q. of about 50 while other animals including the domesticated canine (dog) only have an I.Q. of about 36. Their E.Q. is relatively close to most other animals such as the dog and horse."


 * I agree. That is just plain nonsense. Psychofox 13:18, 22 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Where it says E.Q. could it mean encephalization quotient [i.e. a measure of how big the brain is]? --128.211.221.149 20:25, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Largest Breed
I removed the following quote because if you make a wild x domestic cross it is no longer F. s. catus and therefore doesn't belong in an article about F. s. catus - it belongs in an article about hybrids. Also, the largest breed of domestic cat is the Maine Coon which I have seen at 25lbs with no fat. Needless to say there is NOT anything like a general agreement on the statement below.Pschemp 04:59, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

"Generally agreed to be the largest breed of cat is the wild hybrid Savannah and can weigh up to 15 kg (32 pounds) without being obese."

I'm sorry but the Savannah is a MAN-MADE hybrid and not F. s. catus....thus its genetics preclude it from belong in this article....as the Main Coon, at 25 lbs IS the largest domestic breed....there is no disagreement there. Pschemp 00:57, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Also, since this article is about F. s. catus and not just felines in general - this sentence should be removed considering it is talking about another species. "One of the smallest cat species is the black-footed cat, which weighs just over 1 kg (2.2 lb)." Pschemp 01:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC)


 * From my searches, I've found that other large domesticated cats may include (but not limited to) the Ragdoll and the Ragamuffin. Because these breeds are supposedly placid "lap cats", they are kept indoors.  One draw-back as the article implies is the cat's love for sunshine (a good source of Vitamin D).  Ariele 19:00, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I've been to many, many cat shows and have seen 25lb Maine Coons. I have seen lots of Ragdolls and Ragamuffins, but have never seen any near the size of the Maine Coon, their frame size is much much smaller.  I've seen Maine Coon paws that are 2.5 inches wide. Actually the second largest breed is the Turkish Van which I have seen at 20-22 lbs and my large ones are often mistaken for Maine Coons.  Then I'd put the Ragdolls after that. I have friends who are Ragdoll breeders and I wouldn't call the breed small by any means, but it is no where near the largest.   Pschemp 20:58, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree that the Main Coon is likely the largest of pure bred cats. I added the comment about the Ragdoll and Ragamuffin because some folks (myself included) may be looking for a larger sized cat that may also become a companion/playmate and  surrogate parent for small children.  Ariele 01:55, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Hypoallergenic cat
Again, an article about genetically engineerd cats would be more appropriate for this information. It has not even been proven that this technology will make any effect on human cat allergies. At this point it is speculation. CC, the cloned cat has her own article, and I think this is a similar situation. Your statement below sounds rather like a commercial for the company rather than NPOV.Pschemp 01:10, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

"Los Angeles-based Allerca inc. announced the development of a genetically engineered hypoallergenic cat that lacks the production of the salivary and skin protein Fel l d 1, the protein is believe to be used by cats for territory marking but is also the cause of the majority of cat allergies. Allerca plans the first births of these cats by 2007."

Richard Booth
I have removed the line "Celebrated filmmaker and writer Richard Booth has nicknamed cats "woosels" in one of his more notable works." After checking through Wikipedia I could find only one Richard Booth who is not an author or filmaker. There is one listing on Google for a "Richard Booth filmaker" and that is for a 15 year old and his first film was in 2004. Not exactly "celebrated". The only "Richard Booth writer" is for an online Agony Aunt! If he is celebrated why nothing on Wikepedia or a mention in the sentence as too the name of his notable work. Also the woosel is more likly to be associated with Winnie-the-Pooh. The line reeks of nonsense but if it can be proved otherwise I will happily put it back. CambridgeBayWeather 13:24, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Cat Genetics and the White Dominant (W) gene
There are a few passages in the section on cat genetics which can be confusing:

1)"Completely white cats (not to be mistaken with albinism) with blue eyes have a higher genetic probability of being born deaf than the average cat. It is most likely to occur if they are born with blue eyes" All kittens' eyes are blue when they are born. They usually change color after 1-2 months (depending on eye color and breed of cat). So, I believe a better wording would be to simply say: "it can occur if a cat is totally white with blue eyes". Eye colour at birth is not a criterion.

2)The text says: "(deafness)happens due to the dominant W gene. This certain gene usually gives the cat a white coat, blue irises, and deafness." This suggests that the W gene induces mostly deaf cats. Not correct!

the article goes on to say later: "Around 5% of all cats are completely white, of which 10%–20% are deaf." Quite correct.

I would suggest the first sentence to be changed to say: "This certain gene usually gives the cat a white coat, blue irises, and much more rarely, deafness".

And yes, I could have done the edits myself. But since this is a very high-quality article, and I have no intent of starting an edit war, I wanted to submit these points before changing anything to the main article.Ramdrake 15:45, 12 October 2005 (UTC) Ramdrake


 * I agree, edit away. It is going to take more than just a few sentences changes to get this section clear and accurate though. Of course all kittens are born with closed blue eyes, you are right there.  Here is some more input on the genetics.  My sources are Robinson's Genetics for Cat Breeders and Veternarians, ISBN 0750640693 and one of the authors, Lorraine Shelton, with whom I recently attended a lecture about the W gene and the piebald white spotting gene (S).  S can cause extensive white spotting (the extent is related the lehgth of the gene inherited, ie. longer gene = more white) but is not related to W and does not cause deafness.  I don't trust a lot of the internet "sources", they tend to get things wrong and then replicate them around the world.


 * W is usually called the white masking gene or epistatic white. It hides any color or pattern a cat may have inherited from a non-white parent.  In practice the percentage of white cats with TWO blues eyes that are deaf is approximatly 40%.  Due to the W gene's inhibition of the progression of pigment cells (melanoblasts) along the neural crest in utero development, the irises of the eyes do not get pigment, resulting in a blue iris.  Because the inner ear structure is in close proximity to this area during fetal development, deafness is beleived to result as small hairs in the inner ear are also affected by the W gene.  If an all white cat has one blue and one yellow eye (odd eyed), then the chances of it being fully deaf are almost nonexistent, however there have been some cases where the ear on the yellow eye side was functional and the ear on the blue eyed side was not.  About 7% of all white cats with two yellow eyes are also deaf, as coat color is not the only thing that the W gene affects.


 * Interestingly, often there is a very small patch (three or four hairs in size) of colored hair on all white cats, resulting from incomplete dominance of the W gene in that area and it may be possible to tell the recessive coat color of the cat from this patch. This is important in breeding, beacuse that cat is able to pass that color to its offspring.  Pschemp 05:29, 29 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Ok, I gave in, I started to clean it up...just couldn't stand the gross inaccuracies...feel free to jump in. I'm not convinced that a foriegn white is at all different from an oriental shorthair, and I KNOW that breed has W because I've worked with it, which would preclude them being protected from the effects of the W gene.  I think the original poster may have just mixed up the fact that siamese cats with two blue eyes are not deaf because their blue eyes are caused by albinism, which is totally different than the W blue eyes.  I'll have to go look in to that, in the mean time, I've left it in.Pschemp 06:20, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Just two ideas about reproduction

 * Perhaps a paragraph could be added to deal with contraception: the methods (surgical, chemical), the reasons (behaviour) and the consequences (weight gain).
 * In Western Europe, the females are in heat in January-February and July-August. Is it the same everywhere ? And why is that so ? Ze miguel 00:30, 23 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Ok, in the US right now, there is no currently approved chemical method of contraception for cats. The practice has been explored further in Europe, but what works well for dogs has been dicey in cats to say the least. Ovaban (approved for dogs) is sometimes used in females but many nasty side effcts have been observed when anything but extremley low dosages are used. Spaying and neutering are the only currently approved methods.  As for wieght gain being a side effect that can be true of humans, I don't know about dogs, and cycling females usually return to a normal weight when on Ovaban, rather than a hormone induced state of being underweight.  If a cat is not absolutely neccesary for genetic diversity in a breeding program it should be spayed or neutered, leaving the question of other forms of birth control irrelevent.


 * A more in depth discussion of these issues may be warranted, or maybe a separate article about spaying and netuering? Female heat cycles in the US vary a lot from region to region, and I'm sure they do all over the world too because they are triggered by the hours of daylight in a day, which of course varies depending on placement in time zone, hemisphere, season, etc... Also, cats kept indoors may have different cycling times than those that are outdoors or have access to the outdoors.  It would be extremely difficult to nail down a universal cycling time but generalizations could be made I suppose. Pschemp 05:45, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Human Food Items Fatal to Cats
In addition to chocolate, other food items that are fatal to cats include onions and garlic. Does anyone know of any others that can be harmful for a cat? Ariele 21:37, 27 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Chocolate fatal to cats? My cat Bey Bey loves Whoppers (which are covered in chocolate). But then, he is one odd cat. --mav 04:07, 29 October 2005 (UTC)


 * yup...but they need to eat A LOT of it. Like a pound, which is like us eating 10% of our body weight in chocolate.  For a 150lb person that's 15 lbs of chocolate.  I don't think I'd feel very good after eating that much either.  I don't think a Whopper is going to kill them.   Additionally there are tons and tons of houseplants that are toxic to cats (especially lillies and things in the lily family) but to list them all would be quite cumbersome in this article. Garlic and onions can cause anemia, some cats are more sensitive to these than others though and you will find garlic as a cat food additive evern though it is known to not be that great for cats.  I think its in Nutro brand...Anyway, the list of substances can go on, asprin, ibuprofen, tylenol, naproxen sodium, antifreeze, yew, pesticides, bleach, many cleaning agents, FLEA DIPS and SHAMPOOS and FELA COLLARS are also higly toxic and known to have killed cats....(Capstar and a spot on flea repellent negate the need for those anyway). Lots of things can get on their coats and they can ingest them during grooming, toothpaste isn't good for them, and last of couse a vegitarian diet will kill your cat too.  I can keep going but I think you get the point Pschemp 04:59, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Does anyone know if "milk" could potentially become fatal for an adult cat? I've read somewhere that said an adult cat is not able to digest milk and can become ill from it. What about fish? For some reason, mine was allergic to fish such as "tuna". ><> .... thank you. Ariele 05:32, 6 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Milk: Never mind, found the answer.... Ariele 05:38, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Heart rate, vitals
The article states, "A domestic cat's normal heart rate ranges from 120 to 220 beats per minute, and is largely dependent on how excited the cat is. For a cat at rest, the average heart rate should be between 110 and 130 beats per minute."

I work as a veterinary technician. We consider the "optimal" median heart rate of a healthy, unstressed cat to be 160 bpm. A relaxed, dozing cat may have a somewhat lower HR (a condition we would never see in a veterinary hospital) but a pulse of 110 bpm is alarmingly low. 130 bpm would still be indicative of a problem; cats typically present with those heart rates when in hypovolemic shock after traumatic events (getting hit by a car, etc). Even a healthy anesthetized cat should maintain a heart rate above 140.

The source that those numbers came from should be considered skeptically, if not discounted entirely. --Bk0 (Talk) 00:25, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Meowing
I've read in multiple places cats do not "meow" to each other or for communication, and it's a noise they make only around humans. 153.104.16.114 22:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC)


 * You obviously have never been around cats in a fight, cats in heat, male cats calling girls and kittens who've lost their mom. And that's just cat communication I can name off of the top of my head.  They meow during all of those things and it has nothing to do with humans. Pschemp 22:56, 5 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I have to agree with Pschemp. I have heard a cat "meowing" for my kitty to come outside.  Ariele 05:19, 6 November 2005 (UTC)