Talk:Cat/Archive 2

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

message: 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)
thread_title: Help Topic

message: 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)
thread_title:  cat vertebrae 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Urban Legend Reference

message: 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)
thread_title:  purr when distressed 

message: 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)
thread_title:  vision 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Article structure 

message: 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)
thread_title: Just to say

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

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
thread_title: Defacement

message: 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)
thread_title:  Spoken Audio 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Vandals 

message: 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)
thread_title:   Diseases 

message: 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)
replies: text: I agree.  That is just plain nonsense. Psychofox 13:18, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  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)
thread_title: IQ

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Largest Breed

message: 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)
thread_title: Hypoallergenic cat

message: 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)
thread_title: Richard Booth

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: Milk:  Never mind, found the answer.... Ariele 05:38, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Human Food Items Fatal to Cats 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Heart rate, vitals 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Meowing