Talk:Ferret-legging

message: After all, we are humans, we do all kinds of stuff. HighInBC 00:19, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't believe everything- Katz made the mistake of believing the carnival barkers when they spun stories of how vicious and dangerous these animals are. His description of the animals as "pirannas with feet...fur bearing evil...the only animal that kills just for kicks" were lies that came straight from the people selling the event. This was hype to make the event more crowd pleasing.  What ferret owners (including the ferret-leggers) know, but the spectators did not, is that properly raised ferrets are gentle playful animals that rarely bite, but that love exploring dark enclosed spaces.  In other words the performers were simply playing with their pets and creating the illusion of doing something dangerous.  It was a trick and Katz fell for it.JeffStickney 21:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I believe it 

message: This article and the sentence in the Ferret article that links to it are written in the present tense, but the only source of information is a fairly old (and unreliable) article. Is ferret legging still practiced or does this need to be changed to the past tense?JeffStickney 21:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Present Tense? 

message: Does this actually still exist (hopefully not)?  I cannot discount the possibility of its continued existence entirely however it sounds quite vile and therefore many questions about its present status arise.Nizhny 02:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The source article is over 20 years old, and what few google sources I can find that don't come directly from that article say its popularity has plummeted since, but I can't find any definitive source that says it's gone.JeffStickney 20:14, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: This seems suspicious

message: The cite is a spoof article.  Did anyone read it before removing the last deletion recommendation?
:I have, and while elements of it are clearly nonsense, as Jeff Stickney says above, I don't think it's a spoof; it's just badly researched.  Daibhid C 23:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not just badly researched, it's obviously a joke. "A baby was killed and eaten in 1978..." should be all you need, but indeed it goes on. It's a clear narrative with obvious caricatures and tons of clearly incredulous statements throughout. -bjc (talk) 23:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I cant figure out how this article is still here. It's palpable nonsense and has no place in Wikipedia. Excalibur (talk) 09:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

text: It is most certainly not a "fictional practice", although now frowned on by the RSPCA. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Come on 

message: Hey, it's real. I've got videos.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.170.215.254 (talk) 21:31, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Totally Real 

message: "Some very big Yorkshiremen stood around us in the pub. Some of them claimed they had bitten the heads off sparrows, shrews, and even rats, but none of them would compete with Reg Mellor. One can only wonder what suffering might have been avoided if the Argentine junta had been informed that sportsmen in England put down their pants animals that are known only for their astonishingly powerful bites and their penchant for insinuating themselves into small dark holes. Perhaps the generals would have reconsidered their actions on the Falklands."
This whole article is just comedy. It's also an old-fashioned music-hall joke - if you wish to defend it then feel free, provide some proper evidence, but as a Yorkshireman myself I regard it as racist claptrap. Funny, but racist. Wikipedia deserves better than this. Excalibur (talk) 21:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ... and "Excalibur" was a fictional sword. So what? --Malleus Fatuorum 22:07, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "DH Lawrence used a real surname in a work of fiction, therefore anyone with that surname doesn't actually exist" - haha, better AfD all these people, then, Mr Excalibur.. Totnesmartin (talk) 22:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  One source

message: Here, complete with added references. You put them in. Eric Barbour (talk) 22:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say this there but their silly "no free email registration" rule prevents me: Thank you StumbleUpon for pointing this article at me in the first place. Now ferret legging has the article it deserves! Totnesmartin (talk) 06:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  discussed on WR 

message: The sport may alternatively have originated during the time when only the relatively wealthy were allowed to keep ferrets, forcing the animal poachers to hide their illicit ferrets in their trousers This is based entirely on the following bit from the Northern Echo, 4 January 2005, : "In days of old, only the very rich were allowed to own ferrets." Instead of this silliness, a word about the actual use of ferrets by rat-catchers and rabbit-hunters would be more sensible: sense may not be what's required, however.--Wetman (talk) 19:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a historical fact that a law was passed in England in 1390 probiting anyone other than "gentlemen" (defined by rental income) from owning ferrets, so that may be worth adding to convince doubting Thomas's like you that none of this article has been invented. The point therefore is that when discovered by a gamekeeper, poachers had to hide their illegally owned ferrets about their person. The use of ferrets by rat-catchers and rabbit-hunters has nothing to do with this article, which is about ferret legging. It would be good as well if you could avoid the use of words like "silliness" in future. What looks "silly" to me is your apparent peeve that this article wasn't deleted. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Toffs and ferrets

message: * http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21012071
Andy Dingley (talk) 13:41, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brief BBC mention today 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ferret-legging. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090910033647/http://archive.thisisthenortheast.co.uk/2005/01/04/27436.html to http://archive.thisisthenortheast.co.uk/2005/01/04/27436.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:01, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: According to Snopes: "Ferret-legging, allegedly a 'sport' ... was reported in an article twenty years ago [in] Outside magazine, was riddled with factual errors ... that apologists attribute to 'poor research on an actual sport.' The Wikipedia article ... has no direct sources except for Katz's article. It has been nominated for deletion twice; both times, the votes were split fifty/fifty and the article was kept. Did Katz write a poor article on an actual sport, or did he make it up?" --Cornellier (talk) 02:35, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't (for the moment) supply references, but I am a 62-y-o Brit and have been aware of this sport all my life. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.2.132 (talk) 09:16, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snopes on ferret legging