Talk:Foldex cat

Requested move 28 January 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Procedural close. A merge discussion was started which renders this RM invalid. There's no action to be taken, from what I can see. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:12, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Foldex cat → Foldex – Unnecessary disambiguation. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  03:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 12:33, 5 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Does the article itself even meet notability? No recognition from a major registry and very little citations on the article with most being about the Scottish Fold.
 * Messybeast just includes in a list and the other sites are just generic cat websites that have articles on as many breeds and unrecognised breeds as possible for engagement/advertising revenue. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * If it isn't a recognized breed, then I'd argue for it to be merged or deleted. Btw, Traumnovelle, I've noticed your recent work and cat breeds, and thank you for it. Happy editing, SilverTiger12 (talk) 21:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * A merge discussion is a separate kind of discussion (opened below). This one is just about the title.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:32, 3 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Support and Keep Neutral per discussion below and per nom< andK/s> cuteness. The Canadian Cat Association, which recognizes and shows this breed along with 53 others, is a notable organization and event sponsor, with "its pedigrees and registrations accepted by major global associations such as the Cat Fanciers' Association, The International Cat Association, and Fédération Internationale Féline". Randy Kryn (talk) 12:33, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Comments in section below.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:32, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merge discussion
The RM above raised questions of whether this should remain a stand-alone article, or merge.

says above: Does the article itself even meet notability? No recognition from a major registry and very little citations on the article with most being about the Scottish Fold. Messybeast just includes in a list and the other sites are just generic cat websites that have articles on as many breeds and unrecognised breeds as possible for engagement/advertising revenue.

For Foldex, there be additional sourcing available for this. It bears looking into. We need to beware of generic "internet cat sites" that simply cannibalize press-release-style material from breeders, and borrow (usually uncredited) from Wikipedia itself (WP:CIRCULAR, WP:CITOGENESIS). Speaking of which, Messy Beast is not a reliable source, it's just a personal blog of an amateur cat breeder and feral-cat tamer who doesn't have any particular qualifications, an "archive of cat-related articles, information and clip-art" that is a mixture of primary-source personal opinion and weak tertiary-source summarization of other material (reliable and not).

If merged, it would be just as a summary expansion of the section at List of experimental cat breeds. This experimental breed could also be mentioned at Scottish Fold as an offshoot/crossbreed, but we need to avoid doing a duplicate section there. (I just cleaned up something like this the other day, where a bunch of experimental Munchkin crossbreeds had WP:CONTENTFORK sections both at Munchkin cat and at List of experimental cat breeds, resolved by merging material to the latter and reducing the material in the former to a short list with sectional links to the material in the latter.)

Also above, says: The Canadian Cat Association, which recognizes and shows this breed along with 53 others, is a notable organization and event sponsor, with "its pedigrees and registrations accepted by major global associations such as the Cat Fanciers' Association, The International Cat Association, and Fédération Internationale Féline".

That's a bit of an overstatement or a misunderstanding. CFA, TICA, and FIFe accept CCA registrations in breeds ; zero of them recognize a Foldex breed, even as provisional/experimental. I've checked. FIFe has nothing; same with CFA. TICA has been aware of Foldex since at least 2015 as a "breed" consisting of two individual cats. The newest material they have that mentions it dates to 2021 and they have an internal code for it, but it is not among the "Championship Breeds" or "breeds accepted by the Board for Registration only" (whoTF taught them how to capitalize?), and it is not among their recognized and registerable breeds, nor is it included within their Scottish Fold definition as a variant. Further, Scottish Fold has been banned by FIFe and several other registries, including GCCF and WCF, due to severe genetic problems, which means any new breed based on it, like Foldex is, will also not be permitted (absent proof that the genetic issues have been bred out, which is probably impossible in this case, because it is the gene that causes the ear-cartilage folding that also causes the skeletal problems at issue). The SF has also been legally banned in various jurisdictions for animal-welfare reasons. CFA and TICA both still accept SF, as does NZCF but only under stringent breeding control and repeat medical examination.

Nascent breeds recognized by nothing but a single national-level or smaller organization (rarely independent of the breeders that comprise it) generally get merged to List of experimental cat breeds, but we'll have to see whether any further independent sourcing can be found. Most attempts to establish new breeds (of anything) fail, and WP is not a database of breeding experiments that people have put a name to. In this particular case, the experimental breed may be doomed due to heritable medical problems gotten from the Scottish Fold. That said, the issues could in and of themselves generate enough (controversy-laden) coverage to confer notability, as was the case with the now-extinct Ojos Azules. Remains to be seen. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:32, 3 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I think it should be merged. Nothing noteworthy about the breed, if it generated controversy like the Ojos Azules as you mentioned it could merit an article but there isn't even a controversy about the breed - simply a lack of attention/recognition due to the Scottish Fold ban. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Support merge, then. SilverTiger12 (talk) 05:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Support - Does not meet WP:GNG. Choucas Bleu  (T·C) 16:03, 12 March 2024 (UTC)