Talk:Iriomote cat

message: "The meat of the cat is considered to be a delicacy on the island", quoth the article.  While this may have been true at some point in the remote past, I think modern-day Iriomoteans would be aghast at eating their cute fuzzy-wuzzy symbol of mucho tourist dinero. I certainly didn't see any restaurants even hinting at the possibility when I visited. Jpatokal 03:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm trying to find a link to it, but I was reading a Japanese article where an elderly gentleman was being interviewed, and he said something about having eaten some of the cat meat many decades ago.  In modern times, the practice is, I'm fairly sure, illegal, but the reality of people eating the cats seems to at least be recent enough that it's within the living memory of some people. -Rikoshi 22:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I am a researcher currently working on the Ryukyu islands. I have performed over hundred systematic interviews with locals (not yet published), and I can second the initial sentence to some extent. Many locals have been eating historically eating Iriomote cats as "nabe" until the 60s. The region is historically poor (it is still the less developed prefecture of Japan nowadays), and the inhabitants had been eating Iriomote cat mainly for subsistence. I cannot comment on the meat being a "delicacy" though. -ChriVin (talk) 11:08, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cat meat?! 

message: I don't think that this is actually a picture of this cat. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.27.139.82 (talk) 22:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  That was a picture of a normal Leopard Cat, but the Iriomote Cat looks different.  I removed the picture. Calathan 20:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: I know it's probably futile to ask, and really, at the current pace, it's an amusing diversion from some of the other items on my watchlist, but... could we please try discussing whether or not to include the suborder in the infobox over here on the talkpage instead of just having the slowest editwar in Wikihistory about it?  Rdfox 76 13:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current edit-miniwar 

message: Could we please ease up on the multiple reverts and discuss the edits here, please? I believe a couple of folks broke 3RR in the past day, which is a bad thing. I see the edit summaries say "look here," but it would be best for everyone to discuss the situation here on the talk page and sort it out. Tony Fox (arf!) 06:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed to talk here. There simply is no justification for capitalizing the words against WP:MoS, and for that matter, against English language rules of capitalization. I would be most happy to take this to RfA, and see that WP:BIRD ruled upon. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 07:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I support taking this to RfA, this has been going on for some time with no resolution. Bugguyak (talk) 14:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Long overdue for a RfA, I also support that. Beyazid (talk) 20:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Thanks, many many editors have engaged in this topic also.  You can go to almost any well-known megafauna article and if the article is capitalized there is almost certain to be a comment thread or multiple comment threads in the Talk pages pointing out how that doesn't make sense.  You can go through the edit histories and see where many editors have changed it to be right, only to be reverted, almost entirely by just UtherSRG -- with never more substantive justification than the bizarre WP:BIRD. It certainly is a mystery to me why this argumentation still strangely is offered as if it's in any way meaningful. Beyazid (talk) 20:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Add me to that. These shouldn't be capitalized. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 18:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm going to pull out my crystal ball here and say that I expect the RfArb will be declined as premature, as little discussion has occurred, there hasn't been an RfC or any other effort at DR, and the RfArb looks to be malformed, anyway.  (Not that I'm not thinking this needs to be resolved--we have people blowing past 3RR over a friggin' CAPITALIZATION dispute here.  If this doesn't get nipped in the bud soon, we're gonna be looking at a new entry on WP:LAME here...) Rdfox 76 (talk) 22:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: (e.c.) Coming here from the above-mentioned arbitration case, I'd like to kindly warn all involved that edit warring is not the proper way to settle content disputes; indeed it may get everyone here blocked without further notice should they continue. To resolve this dispute, please refer to the procedures outlined at WP:DR instead. Requesting a third opinion may be appropriate here. Should dispute resolution fail, a brief note at the incidents noticeboard would be more appropriate than requesting arbitration, which is an absolute last resort to be used only where other methods of resolution have failed. Sandstein (talk) 22:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Meanwhile please note uther going in reverting in defiance of all this, like the brain-dead Energized bunny-here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iriomote_Cat&curid=276518&diff=195453324&oldid=195415366 Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 02:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit warring 

message: I engaged the same lowercase vs. capitals on species common names with Uther on the bobcat and cougar pages over the course of several months. There was a consensus reached for lowercase. WP:BIRDS does not apply here and there are plently of ornithologists who feel it doesnt apply to birds either. He is engaging in unwarranted reverts again for some reason. I stand behind your edits. Bugguyak (talk) 19:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, many many editors have engaged in this topic also.  You can go to almost any well-known megafauna article and if the article is capitalized there is almost certain to be a comment thread or multiple comment threads in the Talk pages pointing out how that doesn't make sense.  You can go through the edit histories and see where many editors have changed it to be right, only to be reverted, almost entirely by just UtherSRG -- with never more substantive justification than the bizarre WP:BIRD. It certainly is a mystery to me why this argumentation still strangely is offered as if it's in any way meaningful. Beyazid (talk) 20:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Add me to that. These shouldn't be capitalized. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 18:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: from [[User talk:Beyazid|Beyazid]]

message: Please see the above link because I have filed a request for arbitration against User:UtherSRG. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 22:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to pull out my crystal ball here and say that I expect the RfArb will be declined as premature, as little discussion has occurred, there hasn't been an RfC or any other effort at DR, and the RfArb looks to be malformed, anyway.  (Not that I'm not thinking this needs to be resolved--we have people blowing past 3RR over a friggin' CAPITALIZATION dispute here.  If this doesn't get nipped in the bud soon, we're gonna be looking at a new entry on WP:LAME here...) Rdfox 76 (talk) 22:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: (e.c.) Coming here from the above-mentioned arbitration case, I'd like to kindly warn all involved that edit warring is not the proper way to settle content disputes; indeed it may get everyone here blocked without further notice should they continue. To resolve this dispute, please refer to the procedures outlined at WP:DR instead. Requesting a third opinion may be appropriate here. Should dispute resolution fail, a brief note at the incidents noticeboard would be more appropriate than requesting arbitration, which is an absolute last resort to be used only where other methods of resolution have failed. Sandstein (talk) 22:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Meanwhile please note uther going in reverting in defiance of all this, like the brain-dead Energized bunny-here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iriomote_Cat&curid=276518&diff=195453324&oldid=195415366 Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 02:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#misapplication of WP:BIRD]]

message: Please all note that an appropriately centralised discussion has been formed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mammals#Capitalization re-visited. I suggest all discussion nonspecific to the Iriomote Cat is directed there, in the aid of a more productive, reasoned and followable discussion. BigBlueFish (talk) 23:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Centralised discussion

message: The Irimoto cat has gained some fame by being featured prominently in Azumanga Daioh. Should we mention that?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.42.184.121 (talk) 22:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not on this article dealing with the animal, see Wikipedia:Notability#Notability guidelines do not directly limit article content. --Tombstone (talk) 07:21, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is indeed already mentioned on the Japanese-language page. It's not entirely out of the question to put it here.  Evan1975 (talk) 01:40, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Famous Irimoto Cats 

message: I just spent one hour to look for and select interesting and authoritative sources for this article. Those PDF studies are on the top of this talkpage (shortcut : Talk:Iriomote Cat/to do). Most of these sources are just 10 pages long. If there is someone interested by this funny Iriomote cat, let's roll ! Reade one of these study, and create a 15-20 lines summary, to add it into this wiki article ;).
I myself return to my 'field of expertise' : China, Chinese history, etc.  Yug (talk) 15:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources provided for further expansion ! 

message: I translated the Japanese article into English. Any sources and information in the preexisting English article that didn't appear in the Japanese were also incorporated. I also added some information I was able to find from some of the source texts. I tweaked the local names of the cat as well to be more direct translations. Bahbahbethsheep (talk) 12:02, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Translated Japanese article

message: I have just edited the modifications done by 173.66.252.37, who wrongfully turned the Iriomote cat into a species on its own. What's more, he did so without modifying the rest of the article, thereby introducing total incoherence. The author cited a webpage of an NGO, the Feline Conservation Federation, to justify his statement that the Iriomote cat would have recently been recognized as a species. First, this is nothing more than a webpage, and not a peer-reviewed scientific publication. Second, although the content of the webpage is indeed ambiguous as it mentions the cat as "Prionailurus iriomotensis" and states that "there are no sub-species of the Iriomote cat, since they only live on Iriomote Island", it does not say that the cat is a species on its own. Moreover, clicking on "More about the Iriomote Cat", a new webpage from the same website opens, in which it is explicitly written that "recent genetic analysis confirms that the Iriomote cat and the Tsushima cat are subspecies of Leopard cat". 
I would really like to set the record straight once and for all, because as scientist, I am very much annoyed by the nationalistic motivations that have been pushing some people over the last decades to see the Iriomote cat as a species, thereby denying the abundant literature on the subject and the overwhelming opinion of the scientific community. I don't need to provide any reference to support my position, as appropriate references are already given in the wikipedia article. Still, I have added Masuda and Yoshida (1995) and Warren et al (1999) to complement the existing references and make sure that this situation does not happen again. -ChriVin (talk) 11:49, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your edits both on this talk page and the article itself. I'm just a layperson who has been watching the article for a while, so it's nice to see someone with more expertise join in. If you see anything else in the article that needs updating, please feel free to hop in again. -- purplepumpkins (talk) 15:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomy: species vs subspecies 

message: Yes, me again. Look, even if dogs do eat cats (they don't) if they kill them they still could eat them, PLUS (and listen to this) even if you think they DO eat them, not all dogs do. So it would be MORE accurate to just put "kill" as a lot of(well, all, is what i think) dogs just leave the cats. So are you going to put "prey on or kill" or just "kill" which can leave to preying on? Also, i'll never let this go, as i'm autistic, so i'll do anything possible to make it right.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.159.114.22 (talk) 19:15, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Blackmail is not one of the supported resolution mechanisms at WP, sorry. You have been told multiple times that reliable sources contradict your personal opinion. You have been warned multiple times (now by an admin) to stop edit-warring. The next edit of this kind is likely to get you blocked, after which your autism will just have to sit it out.-- Elmidae (talk) 19:25, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: dogs

message: Listen, please. Killings can lead to predatation. It would be more accurate, as they just kill them, but you think they eat them too. First let me show an example... My dog (dead) would pull you over to get at some crumbs. She loved eating. It was her favourite thing. She chased cats, but never intended to catch them, like most dogs. Her second favourite thing was killing things. She tried to drown lambs, killed birds, rabbits, and other animals. But despite loving eating she never ate what she killed. If a dog that loves eating wouldn't eat a bird it killed, it wouldn't eat a cat. And I've not finished yet. My own cat's mother was killed by a dog, I have heard plenty of accounts of dogs killing cats. They all have one thing in common. The cat is deaf and sleeping at the same time. I doubt Iriomote cats live long enough to go deaf, but some must. Or if the cat is injured or lame. This is very few, and very few dogs even kill cats. This means hardly any eat cats. Also, these are domestic dogs, so they don't need to eat cats. So this is the reason you need to put that they kill cats to be right. TheFeralCat (talk) 15:47, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not about your mom's cat, your severely limited personal experience, or your obsession with expanding the same to unconnected topics. This is a question of referenced sources vs anecdotes. I'm DONE with arguing about it.-- Elmidae (talk) 16:17, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: dogs again

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Iriomote cat. 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/20150923202306/http://www.biodic.go.jp/rdb_fts/2000/74-063.html to http://www.biodic.go.jp/rdb_fts/2000/74-063.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141129035721/http://www.sizenken.biodic.go.jp/rdb/txt/content/006.html to http://www.sizenken.biodic.go.jp/rdb/txt/content/006.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120620202308/http://www.env.go.jp/nature/yasei/hozonho/list_domestic.pdf to http://www.env.go.jp/nature/yasei/hozonho/list_domestic.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120120044938/http://www.env.go.jp/park/iriomote/intro/basis.html to http://www.env.go.jp/park/iriomote/intro/basis.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100909153854/http://painusima.com/t10namaebosyu.htm to http://painusima.com/t10namaebosyu.htm
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) 13:17, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi everybody,
I found a newer source on the Iriomote cat's diet than the one given in the text. It used stomach content analysis and arrived at different results than the ones given here, but I currently don't have the time to integrate it. I'll leave the citation here if someone else finds the time to add it to the article: Nakanishi N. & Izawa M. 2016. Importance of frogs in the diet of the Iriomote cat based on stomach content analysis. Mammal Research 61, 35–44. DOI 10.1007/s13364-015-0246-9
Robuer (talk) 06:12, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  New source for diet 

message: I don't have access to the work cited in the translation of yamamayaa and the other Yaeyaman terms, nor do I have access to a specifically Yaeyaman dictionary, but my understanding is that in Ryukyuan languages, unlike Japanese, yama tends to be used for various wild areas (including, but not limited to, mountains) and in my Okinawan dictionary (the 1963 国立国語研究所資料集5『沖縄語辞典』) ’jama- is listed as a prefix indicating that something is wild or feral while 'jamamajaa or yamamayaa specifically is defined as 野良猫, "feral cat".
I've refrained from making an edit because I don't want to base a retranslation on a resource for a related language (even for a specific term in a closely-related language), and ultimately even if the Okinawan definition of the term is the same as the Yaeyaman one the current translation is more off than entirely wrong, but I'm also concerned that translation may have come about by reading Yaeyaman as if it were Japanese, so I'd like someone with better access to Yaeyama language resources or more knowledge than me about the language to review this, if possible. Mkpstr (talk) 16:28, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yaeyama language translation