Talk:Every time you masturbate... God kills a kitten

message: I removed this: "In Yoshiyuki Sadamoto's manga adaptation of Neon Genesis Evangelion, the angel Kaworu Nagisa is seen strangling a stray kitten out of pity."
It seems to have absolutely nothing to do with the subject. --Tony Sidaway 01:49, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed "References in popular culture"

message: Is there really a space after the three periods? --HappyCamper 23:25, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is always a space after three periods. SpectrumDT 18:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah, but there should be a space before the ellipsis as well. --66.16.168.205 14:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Always after, but not necessarily before - if it is a trailing sentence... well, then you would connect it to the end of said sentence. ;)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.54.79 (talk) 20:55, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Space after three periods 

message: *Theres a new one going around thats kind of like this: http://www.ceilingcat.com/, maybe add it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.145.181 (talk • contribs) 
*Thanks, I did just that.  Another editor has recommended removing it, however.  Would anyone else care to comment on whether the two are sufficiently related to be in the same article?--M@rēino 22:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agree, the ceiling cat isn't dying anyway. This was just part of the push of some clueless users trying to uyse wikipedia as a webhost and couldn't understand that the consensus is for the ceiling cat image to go away. Kudos for keeping things as should be. --  Drini 02:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Link is dead. --User:Cuervo, not logged in 76.221.178.57 20:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Up again! 220.101.28.25 (talk) 02:20, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ceiling cat 

message: I removed the following statement from the article: "...such as one that says "Every time you masturbate, Mack Brown loses another big game. Please, think of the Longhorns." The kitten being chased by the Domo-Kun is replaced by a Texas Longhorns running back, and the close-up of the kitten's face is replaced by a frustrated looking Texas coach Mack Brown. The parody referred to a long losing streak Brown had against top-10 teams prior to the 2005 Rose Bowl." </br> 
Google turns up 1 hit on "Every time you masturbate, Mack Brown loses another big game." and that hit is this article.</br> 
Even limiting the quotes to  just the first phrase ("Every time you masturbate" Mack Brown loses another big game) generate no non-Wikipedia-mirror hits.</br>   
If anyone can find a citable source, then please cite it and restore the information to the article.  Thanks, Johntex\talk 22:42, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed unsourced info

message: The caption under the picture says "This is not the original image, as the original says 'Lie', not 'Masturbate' "
This information isn't in the article itself. Either the caption is wrong, or that additional information should be incorporated into the article itself.
69.120.160.97 15:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  caption should be incorporated into the story 

message: in links section of page there's link to http://www.cincinato.org/cajon/informatico_dios_gatito.jpg
something like domokun: kitten joke. the link seems to open one broken image with ad text. since the image is broken it only shows ad "please visit my websites to support balbal" and long list of websites. i find this clearly advertising and i dont understand why is the link there in the first place.
i suggest it to be removed.
--80.221.2.1 21:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  odd link? links section  

message: I'm amazed that this one wasn't deleted. The phrase has been around far longer than the mid-nineties as speculated and although I can not provide a source, this is not an original saying. This article is about a photoshopped picture, not an internet meme. I don't think this even qualifies as a meme since the saying was a bit of humor from before the internet was popular. The fact that so many people want to keep this page should not stand in the way of its deletion, since those people obv. don't read wikipedia's rules. Flying Hamster 00:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, just add a "history" section with an  tag; that should keep everyone happy. Ivansanchez 21:05, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's more to it than that. Only borderline assertion of note, no real, reliable sources. Renommed for deletion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Every time you masturbate... God kills a kitten (2nd nomination). Half the arguments used in 2005 wouldn't even come close to holding up today, and the article hasn't really matured as one might have hoped 2 years ago. MrZaiustalk 21:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

text: 24.184.200.190 (talk) 00:29, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is what is wrong with wikipedia 

message: This article says the "image created by a member of the humorous British website B3ta in 2002." but this is incorrect. The image was created by a fark member at fark.com.
Even B3TA own site supports this:
http://www.b3ta.com/features/awards2003/
"3. Every Time You Masturbate, God Kills a Kitten (fark forums)
This picture, which first appeared on Fark, was so popular that the kitten is now named "Cliché Kitty". And they now refer to porn with "protect your kittens."
Moebiusstrip 05:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since you found a source with better info than what's in the article, could you please fix it? Dicklyon 05:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I changed it in the lead, but didn't cite the B3TA source yet; can it be considered a WP:RS? Dicklyon 06:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article incorrectly attributes the photo origin to B3TA 

message: I ran across an article from a July 22, 2007 issue of the New York Times ("Hello, Kitschy" by Rob Walker). It was discussing the history of a new Nicktoons program that features the Domo character. The argument is that it was possible for Nicktoons to find a market for this show because for years this character has been subject of photoshop manipulations on the web. The article makes an explicit reference to this image of the kitten (I'll include the whole paragraph here): 
"In fact, any major exhibition on the history of clowning around on the Internet would have to include a particularly infamous image: a stock-photography kitten appears, via digital manipulation, to be fleeing two angry monsters -- Domo dolls, of course. Resembling a public-service ad, with text that is sophomoric, funny and not worth printing here, it has been referenced and forwarded so many times that a Wired column suggesting a fanciful course on Photoshop for the Web included this homework assignment: Convince someone that you made that one picture with the kitten running from Domo-kun."
As New York Times and Wired articles seem to help make things notable, this seems like relevant information.  The interesting thing is that I remembered the photo but forgot the "sophomoric" phrase.  The number one search result on google for my search for "kitten domo" was the wikipedia article. I'm glad the article hadn't been deleted.  
That being said, I don't know if it's really info. for the article as the author is creating a narrative that places this image into a much bigger, and perhaps more socially significant, story. DPerkel 03:49, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's certainly relevant. The only reason the last AfD came up was because this article was in the dark-grey area of having no sources that directly discussed this phenomenon that weren't just making cursory mention of it and those sources were fairly weak and few in number, and that the most detailed comments from the previous AfDs had been comments like "notable on fark". Adding the above would help a fair bit. That said, no AfD is likely to ever happen again given that it's been through a modern VfD process with people who are actually basing their arguments in policy. MrZaiustalk 06:35, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this info. relevant for the article or just another reason not to delete? 

message: *Google books
*Google Scholar
* Killed like flies and time itself, they pile up in the same way that God kills a kitten every time you masturbate. -- Jreferee   t/c 21:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional references

message: Is "photoshopped" a word?  I saw it in the article and was quite surprised but then looked at the comments here and it seems people use it a lot in here.  So maybe it is a proper word, like "googled" - there's lots of argument around "googling" but I can agree that not to be an error.  "Photoshopping", however, makes an obvious reference to a closed-source program (taking away your freedoms, and all that stuff), and I don't hear it often in my environment. Balrog-kun (talk) 21:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, "photoshopped" is a common tech word to indicate a picture that has been modified. Example Raul654 (talk) 22:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

text: See Photoshopped, and extensive arguments about it at Talk:Photo manipulation/Archive 2. Hopefully someone else can summarize what was actually said there, as I'm repressing it all ;) -- Quiddity (talk) 22:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, I see.  I guess it still makes sense to not use it in articles not related to the program because people that read it don't always know the tech words, and also because apparently Adobe advices against it.  I'll change it and let someone correct after me if the change is not in the right direction. Balrog-kun (talk) 23:19, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photoshopped 

message: Googling "everytime" do find the grammatical difference between "everytime" and "every time," I found this as the third search result. Maybe my fault for thinking "everytime" was a word, but still, this is absurd.--Ellissound (talk) 09:59, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am grateful that reality is frequently absurd! Disliking Google's results doesn't make something non-notable. Previous AfDs and added references have established notability. -- Quiddity (talk) 01:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Everytime

message: There is a new meme every other week on the Internet. I don't see a wikipedia page for Bad Luck Brian or Scumbag Steve. Gtwy (talk) 18:20, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  How is this a wikipedia page? 

message: Please swing by and help improve this new article! :D--Coin945 (talk) 03:30, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[The Internet and cats]]