Talk:British Shorthair/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive

Archives
Main
1 (start - 9/8/06)

Contents

Changed Image

I changed the intellecutually vandalized image back to Happycat because I believe that Happycat represents the species better as a whole. Also, Happycat is not copywritten or trademarked. If you can find me the company that uses Happycat as its logo, then I will revert to the other British Shorthair. Goldenclaw 23:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Really. The old picture was better. Why did they change it?

Who gives a flying shit if it looked 'scientific'? It was the same kind of cat, except it was having fun!

The picture of the cat didn't look very scientific, so I changed the profile image. Xioyux 02:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Good work, but I'm afraid nothing can save this wikipedia entry now. NEDM.--Mikejoyce 11:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I like the first image better and I don't see why we can't acknowlege the internet meme --Stilanas 15:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree,the first image was better. Yet it's not even doom music.

Image isn't free read Wikipedia:Copyrights.Geni 15:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


I can't understand how the search for Happycat comes to here, yet there's NO MENTION AT ALL of NEDM or Happycat! Obviously Happycat/NEDM is now big enough to be added to the famous examples list. Monty2 07:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

The search for Happycat does not come here. —ptk✰fgs 03:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

No need to be afraid!

There is no need for Wikipedia to be afraid of YTMND! Without them where would we get our useless facts in life? Its great that the picture was the happy cat before, no need to be super scientific! Just inteligent with some humor and joy here and there.

the image isn't free we can't use it.Geni 17:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
We're not afraid of NEDM, YTMND or whatever you think we're afraid of. We can't use the image because it's copyrighted by that Russian cat food company. If you want to change the image to something like Happycat, have someone take a picture of a British Shorthair that "looks happier" and upload it to the commons. --LBMixPro<Speak|on|it!> 18:09, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Oh I think they're afraid... fearnotwiki.ytmnd.com After they saw what happened to myspace? No doubt.--Snake Liquid 18:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
People have tried attacking us before. Block them often enough and they go away.Geni 18:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Yeah. An image of a cat is so much of an 'attack'. Get over yourself.SashaNein


Nothing to get over. The image is not free thus we cannot use it. End of debate.Geni 19:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I think she means the whole "Edit Not Guaranteed" fiasco, and the wiki.ytmnd.com/Wikipedia_Vandalism_Fad other things YTMNDers do to Wikipedia.

Its a pic of a cat...Not free my ass SgtSimpson 19:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Probably copyright happycat.ru. It is unlikely that it is PD.Geni 19:22, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Free as in "open source" free. --LBMixPro<Speak|on|it!> 22:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


  • This "Happycat" is ruining a good article. Kill the redirect to SomethingAwful and Make a Happycat article with the humor tag if you want more NEDM, YTMNDers (and then watch your article get deleted). I propose full protection of both the article and its image. --Targetter 21:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
No, better. If someone wants to write about happycat, they can do it at wiki.ytmnd.com/Happycat. Just like Safety Not Guaranteed, this too will end. --LBMixPro<Speak|on|it!>
Separate article? Not a chance. I already deleted two. I will move from semi-protection to full protection if they keep vandalising this article. I will also block any vandals, because like you I have had more than enough of this idiocy. Just zis Guy you know? 21:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
If this s**t doesn't stop, Max is gonna get a very nasty (but still professional) e-mail about what his community is doing to the intellectual community of Wikipedia. Go home, YTMND Soldiers.Targetter 22:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Targetter, you're best sending a PM to max instead. Most legal threats to YTMND get posted on the site and in turn get mocked. Look, Not all YTMNDers like what's going on here. Funny enough I don't see this as a vandalism problem (given they don't write NEDM somewhere on the article) but a content dispute over the better looking Non-free image verses the boring/outdated/ugly free image I see all over Wikipedia. --LBMixPro<Speak|on|it!> 22:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
We have a policy advising the use of free images over non-free ones whenever possible. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:57, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I already know about the Fair Use criteria, but there's many problems with people's view of the term "free". YTMND deals more with pop culture than animal species, so their views on things are different. I know of at least two articles which have a similar edit war. I've already noted the problem above. Even when it comes to celebs, the commons may have an outdated half-decade old pic, but people still want to put a fair use pic that was taken 6 weeks/months ago. Unfortuently, WIKIPEDIA DOESN'T OWN IT! NOR DOES IT HAVE THE RIGHT TO SELL IT IF THEY WANTED TO. Having it on here, then having the Wikimedia foundation sell a hardcopy of Wikipedia with the Happycat image would be as bad as eBaum. People making money off other people's work without royalties or credit, isn't that what YTMND DOESN'T WANT? My best advice in that case is for people to take their own pictures, or get permission from the original copyright owner to release it under GFDL or Creative Commons. If British Shorthairs are so known for their smiles, how hard is it to take a pic that at least resembles Happycat? Either that or go to http://www.happycat.ru and ask them for permission. There's a reason why we have copyright policies. --LBMixPro<Speak|on|it!> 05:16, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
What makes me laugh is the combination of YTMND's hysterical overreaction to eBaumers uploading "their" stuff, and the conspucuous use of copyright music and images in the preparation of individual YTMNDs. One YTMNDer justfied this to me as "fair use parody", but the parody clause only allows you to parody the copyrighted work, it doesn't cover using the copyrighted work in parodying some other work or concept. If the copyright lawyers ever get onto YTMND they are going to have a field day. Just zis Guy you know? 08:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. Companies won't seek legal action against resonably fair parodies, becuase it would tarnish thier image far more so than the parody itself. Television farce shows show technically copyrighted images all the time. Happy Cat appears to feels fine with thier mascot's use on ytmnd.com, where it is portrayed in a positive light and wokrs as a sort of advertisment, HappyCat may not feel the same way about it's image being used for an encyclopedia, without direct credit, which articles do not have room for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.54.23 (talk • contribs)

This is a big war here, I wonder what the final result will be after this war is over, hmmm.... 24.188.203.181 22:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

This is the worst picture of a British Shorthair I've ever seen. Can't you at least find one that isn't obstructed? [[Lib3rtine 17:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)]]

this would first involve finding British Shorthair. Do you own one?Geni 17:45, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

We obviously prefer Happycat.

Most of the users that posted in this comments page prefer the image of Happycat over that other cat, and denying information about the meme in the article is just uninformative. We want Happycat. Don't let Wikipedia turn into a totalitarian death camp because of a couple of elites' ideas on what should and shouldn't be displayed on a public webpage. Goldenclaw 23:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I will block for vandalism any user who uploads an image of Happycat over the existing image, and will delete an unsourced Happycat image on sight. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I was under the impression we were a democratic group of persons, not a facist one. --Snake Liquid 02:23, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
you might want to see WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_an_experiment_in_democracy. In any case copyright law isn't decided by wikipedia but rather the goverments of nation states.Geni 02:28, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
I was talking about user conduct and listening to other people instead of outright ignoring what they say and doing what one wants because they think they're some sort of elite. --Snake Liquid 02:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm listening. As and when you or anyone shows that the image is PD, GFDL or the right type of CC it inclusion in some form can be considered. Until then It will be deleted on sight. Uploaders would be wise to consider that blocking policy allows us to block people who upload copyvios.Geni 02:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
See? That's more like it. People could learn from your example when it comes to article moderation.--Snake Liquid 02:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
If somehow the happycat image passes through copyright, which picture goes into British Shorthair? Clearly, I support the non-Happycat & more-encyclopedic picture, but YTMND (and I've seen this in the past) could easily gather up enough support for users to signup for Wikipedia and vote for the Happycat version, and sorting out the YTMND-biased votes will be very, very difficult. --Targetter 02:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
I doubt that would happen but the article is currently long enough for both to be included.Geni 02:54, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Is it worth putting both pictures in, though? Isn't one picture of a cat for encyclopedic purposes enough? YTMNDers just want their picture in because it's a popular fad of theirs. A common user would probably not be too thrilled with such a picture (although they might get a good laugh), and the picture certainly wouldn't make it into a paper wikipedia, compared to the current one. --Targetter 03:02, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
First of all, the Happycat image is not free. When a free image is available, it should be used in place of the copyrighted image. We've more than established that. Secondly, Just because the fad made its way around SomethingAwful and YTMND does not make it notable enough to be included in a breed description. You Lose! Good Day, Sir! --Targetter 23:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

(message deleted)

  • Isn't that attack block worthy? Targetter 23:39, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

We haven't established anything concerning the origin of Happycat. You keep chanting the mantra: "Itz a russian cat food cat, lol", when there has not been a single link, picture, or article supporting this claim. Therefore, one could only conclude that Happycat is not copywritten. Goldenclaw 23:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Okay, where did You find the image, and where did your source find the image? It has to belong to someone? It's a matter of where the image originated that'll determine whether it can be used here. --Targetter 23:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
link happy now?Geni 23:52, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
"We" refers to the hundreds of YTMND users who saw this page through their webpage, and now some decided to go to this article. You don't actually care about the article itself at all, or any other related article. The opinion doesn't refer to actual people who would search for "British Shorthair" on wikipedia. You just want the first image there for your own strange reasons. You have your own "wiki" for YTMND, if you like you can go make a "British Shorthair" article there and you can put as many "happycat" pictures into it as you like. Not many people would object! Xioyux 00:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

There is only one reason why we are doing this, there was nothing wrong with the first pic, it was change for no reason to a crappy pic Sgt Simpson

Whether To Recognize The Meme Or Not

Whether to recognize NEDM and Happycat in the article will undoubtedly create another revert war. In an effort to prevent a second war over this article, I'm bringing the discussion into the talk page. A user has entered the NEDM information into the famous british shorthairs section, which I am putting up for debate. --Targetter 04:51, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Please note: Polls Are Evil. The results of any poll, which will probably be completely overwhelmed by YTMNDers, are of zero relevance per policy and guidelines. Just zis Guy you know? 15:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Support what makes a Internet meme/fad any less than a movie or motion picture? Its not notable, but if its on this page as a little trivia thing than people would know. Maybe just an image of it, since I'm sure other people wouldn't mind knowing that a cat breed they like is popular in the internet fad community. You people just don't like ytmnd, and you're doing the same thing as them, but voting against.
I oppose the inclusion of NEDM in this article in all forms, as the NEDM internet meme is not notable to anyone outside of the internet meme community (more specifically YTMND and SomethingAwful). If you were to ask a common person about NEDM, chances are, they won't know. Wikipedia is not the place for out of nowhere, meme-related, YTMNDcruft. Take it to your own wiki, where your users care. --Targetter 04:51, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Strongly opposed to "NEDM" being mentioned or represented in this article. It is completely irrelevant, and it is restricted to one or two internet communities, and in no way related to the outside world, or to the internet outside of the YTMND (and, perhaps somethingawful) website. NEDM and "Happycat" simply have no place here. I'm sorry to YTMND users, but these things should be placed in the YTMND wiki, not in Wikipedia. Just because it is known to you does not mean it is important to anyone outside the community. Xioyux 05:03, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Oppose per above. If the happycat somehow makes it to TV, or major motion pictures then maybe a sentence about it in a trivia section. But as an internet meme, especially a YTMND one, it belongs on the YTMND fad list. However, the list has been moved from Wikipedia to YTMND Wiki, so that's where it should go. BTW, Happycat is still a short article. Best time to update it. --LBMixPro<Speak|on|it!> 05:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Strongly oppose. Transient fads on YTMND are of little if any interest to anybody outside the YTMND community. When the fad has been noted in non-trivial coverage in reliable secondary sources then it might become relevant. Coverage of YTMND fads can safely be left to the YTMND wiki. Just zis Guy you know? 09:05, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't know how to make the symbol, but I approve the vote. There are plenty of cross references in articles, when a noun appears in something else entirely unrelated to it, as a form of trivia or otherwise. Why shouldn't it be placed here?--Snake Liquid 08:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Hold on a tick. I thought we weren't supposed to have formal votes like this one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIkipedia_is_not_a_democracy#Wikipedia_is_not_an_experiment_in_democracy--Snake Liquid 01:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
This isn't a vote. It's a debate. Even if YTMND gets a bunch of people together to support Happycat, the admins have the final say. --Targetter 02:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Strongly Support The NEDM happy cat is clearly the most recognizable example of the breed to the internet community, and as a well known meme it's culturally relevant as well. --NEMT 01:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
There is no way this cat has any cultural difference outside of the internet fad/meme community. I think a common person would see the non-NEDM cat as a better example of the breed, since it has not been photoshopped or edited at all.(Stricken comment retracted) --Targetter 02:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
How has the happy cat image been photoshopped/edited? --NEMT 03:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Strongly Support Happycat is a popular meme and it also is a good representation of the breed. There is no reason to favor another picture of a cat over Happycat, and in denying this you are kindling an ember of war within YTMND users. Just go with Happycat. Goldenclaw 02:25, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Again, your cat's popularity is restricted to within the YTMND community. Put it on your Wiki, not on a professional encyclopedia. (Stricken comment retracted) --Targetter 02:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a professional encyclopedia, it's a free encyclopedia - no one is getting paid to contribute. --NEMT 03:13, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
"kindling an ember of war within YTMND users": What is this implying? What kind of war can YTMND possibly wage on Wikipedia? Just curious. --Targetter 04:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
In the past YTMND users have flooded sites and harassed them into getting rid of/changing material that has offended them. With wikipedia they'd probably mass vandalize random pages. That said I don't think any such war will occur even if YTMND doesn't get its way. In all other situations YTMND attacked sites threatening legal legislation against them/ stealing YTMND material. This time the dispute is over whether YTMND's image is copyrighted by someone else. I think the majority of YTMND users would recognize the difference. --AFink 04:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Various groups have attacked us in the past. We deal with it. Ultimately we know more about wikipedia and how to protect it (and have powers to do so) than they know how to hurt it. We also tend to be somewhat more crazy than they are which helps.Geni 12:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
The image is non free and can't be used.Geni 12:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Support I support adding a one sentence mention of Happycat under famous british shorthairs. Even if happycat was confined exclusively to YTMND and Something Awful, which it's not, the simple fact is there are over a hundred thousand people who have seen the image. --AFink 02:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Oppose. I have followed the NEDM fad carefully, and its defining aspects are 1) opposition to humorous portrayal of animal cruelty 2) musical references to DOOM and Coburn and 3) Chapstick. The British Shorthair breed is not even a significant element of the fad (except that the most common image incidentally appears to be a British Shorthair mix), and the fad is not a significant aspect of the British Shorthair. This is much more appropriate to include on the wiki.ytmnd.com YTMND wiki. --Ptkfgs 05:24, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Strongly Support: This is about information, and I believe that the simple blurb that NEDM is a shorthair, is valid. Why even bother making a fuss about it? Does it discredit or reduce the overall information on the article? Not one bit, yet there is a staunch attitude against it. This rings of an elitest attitude, and I'm definitely against that... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bigjake (talk • contribs) .
My concern about your statement is this: You seem to think we're acting elitist by not accepting NEDM as part of the article. I seem to think this is another YTMND-waged war, just like the fight against Bauman, and just like Rude Kitty. I've seen the calls for war, like "Lets [sic] show Wikipedia the error of their ways ... Get on that wiki page and SPREAD THE WORD!"[1] --Targetter 11:41, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Your concern is valid, but with only 166 views and a low rating, I think that particular YTMND is unlikely to influence many people. The likelihood of a "war" on the scale of the Ebaum controversy seems minimal. --Ptkfgs 11:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Support; it's not just YTMND. It's all over the place. But then again, my vote dosen't hold ANY value here. Neither does any other vote here, reguardless if it's nay or yay. Pacific Coast Highway (blah • I'm a hot toe picker) 01:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Other than YTMND and SomethingAwful, where else has the fad been seen? If it really is "all over the place", it may qualify for WP:WEB and therefore can be included. Additionally, I've never seen WP:MEMES until just now. Lemme look at it. --Targetter 01:18, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I strongly support mentioning both Happycat and NEDM as useful entries. Monty2 07:12, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Quantify "useful" by reference to reliable secondary sources. Just zis Guy you know? 09:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Well,I'm a bit neutral,even if it's is all over the place,we need more proof.--The jazz musician 02:18, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Debate Analysis as of 03:41, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

From the Anti-NEDM PoV: Here's what I see so far, and YTMND has the right to add to this. I see two users (ironically both from YTMND) and two wikipedia administrators stating along the lines of "Transient fads on YTMND are of little if any interest to anybody outside the YTMND community." YTMND is stating NEDM should be included because it is a popular internet meme. As proven by an image search on google (happycat site:www.happycat.ru), the happycat image is copyrighted by "Гранд-Альфа" of Russia, and not the exclusive property of SomethingAwful or YTMND. Although it doesn't appear to be the consensus of the opposition to YTMND, I would propose a few solutions (select only one(1)):

  • 1. The Anti-NEDM members withdraw their complaint and allow Happycat on the article.
  • 2. The YTMND members withdraw their complaint and leave the article it is current condition. YTMND should also agree not to further vandalize the page.
  • 3. Request mediation from the Mediation Committee
  • 4. I would probably permit the following sentence on the article: "The British Shorthair is also the breed of a prominent internet meme, known as Happycat, derived from a picture off a russian cat food manufacturer's website." The sentence will not recognize either SomethingAwful or YTMND, and will not make notice of NEDM at all.

This has gone on long enough. Let's settle this soon, because nothing justifies torturing this article. Not Even Doom Music. --Targetter 03:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

YOU just made the reference right there in your last sentence! It's a split vote. I say choice #2, with mention of YTMND and Something Awful. Something Awful did in fact purchase the rights to use the image in the US however they wished.--Snake Liquid 04:44, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Whatever,as long as it's keeping wikipedias policy,it's fine. Oh,if Xioyux and Geni are nominated for admins,they get my vote for clearing this whole thing up,since the beggining. Targeter keep dreaming,since nothing justifies burning cats,not even doom music. --72.50.20.55 04:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't believe this. I'm offering a compromise and this is the kinda crap arguements I get in return? My reference to NEDM in my last sentence was a joke. You know, Irony? Ha ha? lol? Snake Liquid, could I see a source from SomethingAwful proving either they bought the rights or they asked for permission? It might make a difference. 72.50.20.55, Xioyux and Geni have been supporting me the whole way through this thing. Get your facts straight. --Targetter 04:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Haha,lol? So much irony. --72.50.20.55 05:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

YTMND is not a unitary actor, so solutions proposing collective action on the part of YTMND are unlikely to gain any traction. This is clearly not a content dispute, and should be handled as simple forumcruft vandalism. I do not see any need for any of the four proposals. --Ptkfgs 05:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I would say that YTMND is not really worthy of being included in this article. It's an article about a cat breed, not the YTMND. I think the article should be fully protected. --TheM62Manchester 06:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I like option 4. I say add that sentence and then create a new page labeled Happycat and link the sentence to there. Then people can write all they want about the fad where it would actually belong. I'm sure it will get marked for deletion, but so was O rly and that page survived. --AFink 06:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
there are newspaper articles about O rly.Geni 07:10, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Yet if you read the O Rly deletion debates almost no one said "I thought we should delete this until I saw a newspaper article about it. That magically legitimizes the entire thing. The consensus was to keep the article because O Rly was a popular internet meme. Anyway, my point was I'm against mentioning NEDM in this article. I just think happycat should get a brief mentioning due to the image's popularity. If people want to debate adding NEDM and uploading the image then let them do it under a happycat article. --AFink 18:05, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
My reactions about these proposals.
Why can't we have both on the article? Keep the PD one as the main, and put happycat further down. I've seen other articles use both Free and Fair use images on articles.
In order for it to be Fair use, the image needs to relate to the context; that's where describing the meme comes in. In order for #1 to happen, #4 needs to as well. But the meme is only a fad in YTMND. You can't find it in a google test with "-YTMND". Sadly, it doesn't belong. --LBMixPro<Speak|on|it!> 07:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Fair use of the Happycat image would only apply for an article commenting on Happy Cat cat food or their advertising. Using their image to illustrate a breed of cat — or to illustrate the NEDM internet meme — would not be an appropriate use of the image. Please review Wikipedia:Fair use for more details. Additionally, Happycat is not even a verifiable example of a British Shorthair, and the photo is of poor quality compared to the existing image.
Again, I must emphasize that "YTMND" is not a unitary actor, nor can "YTMNDers" be considered to act unitarily. The fad turnover at YTMND is fairly short, and the vandalism to this article will most likely not continue much longer. To compromise the integrity of the article to resolve a pattern of vandalism would be an inappropriate decision. Semi-protection (or full protection) and action against individual vandals are the appropriate response. --Ptkfgs 08:20, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I will be quite happy to block any editor who reinserts the NEDM fad to this article. WP:NOT a playground for YTMNDers. We have had this discussion in numerous contexts, for example "safety not guaranteed", and it seems to me that there is broad consensus that adding fads to mainspace articles is vandalism unless there is substantial coverage of the fad in mainstream anaylses of the subject itself. This is supposed to be a serious encyclopaedia. Just zis Guy you know? 15:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't seem like a serious encyclopedia to me,since any user can post useless facts and crap. --72.50.20.55 15:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

You may wish to read replies to common objections for some perspectives on that idea. --Ptkfgs 16:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Does anyone have one single reliable source that mentions Happycat? Has Happycat ever been covered in the news, or another non-trivial mention in a published work? Until the answer is yes, you can vote all you want, but it won't make a whit of difference, because WP:V is not open to negotiation. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:04, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't find any reliable sources, and I doubt that http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Happycat&defid=1406003 is really a reliable source. --TheM62Manchester 08:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
You would be correct in that assessment. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
We now have the usual idiocy, a YTMND actively soliciting YTMNDers to come and vandalise this article. Any who do, I will block. Just zis Guy you know? 15:23, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Footnotes

  1. ^ [wikiwankersnedm.ytmnd.com Wikipedia calls YTMNDers WANKERS over NEDM (includes winking jesus and hitler!)]. Max/YTMND Inc.. Retrieved on 2006-07-30.a

Trolling, semiprotection?

It would be nice if experienced Wikipedians would stop responding to trolling and get on with the encyclopedia. Would it help if I semiprotected this talk page? --Tony Sidaway 17:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair point. Just zis Guy you know? 17:24, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Would be very nice. Xioyux 17:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes, please. I'll keep an eye on this article, but I'll get back to the RC Patrol too.--Targetter 17:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I've semitprotected, since that seems like a smart move. I will remove the trolling, if nobody objects? Just zis Guy you know? 17:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Bulldogs?

The British Shorthair is a domesticated cat originally bred in the United Kingdom by the Victorians to resemble bulldogs
Can anyone provide some sort of source for this? It seems a little hard to believe. --NEMT 19:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

How about this instead: "The British Blue can be regarded as the feline equivalent of the British Bulldog"[1] ? --Targetter (Lock On) 20:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I think that's vague. What does "equivalent" mean when comparing breeds across species? Although it seems reasonable, neither of the cat breed books I have confirms the "by the Victorians to resemble bulldogs" claim. —ptk⁂fgs 20:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Another quote from the same page It'll have to be modified for wikipedia use: "... Like a bull dog, a British Blue Shorthair has thick, short legs on a heavily muscled body. With broad shoulders and powerful hips, the British is affectionately referred as the body builder or bull dog of the cat fancy."[2] --Targetter (Lock On) 20:48, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I think we need to be careful to keep the article focused on the British Shorthair in general; although blue selfs certainly are the most popular, there are examples with many coat patterns and colors recognized by the major breeding associations. Other than that, I think that page mages a persuasive argument for comparison with bulldogs. —ptk⁂fgs 20:56, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
All great but unless its sourced and verifyable, it shouldn't be in there. Actually i think Persians are more like bulldogs with their flat faces, and short legs. But that's all OR unless someone gets a source. pschemp | talk 04:07, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Woot

It's NEDM cat! - MSTCrow 09:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I have fixed the image. —ptk✰fgs 10:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Well at least it's quiet over the YTMND front. the jazz?! 03:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

A message for the YTMNDers

Would you mind awfully much fucking off and vandalising eBaum for a while? Thank you so much. Just zis Guy you know? 01:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

And I thought the Wikipedia Vandalism Fad had come to the end of its Fad Lifespan. In all reality, only 1 YTMND spawned from this incident. --Targetter (Lock On) 02:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

It Should be Mentioned

I really think Happycat should be mentioned. If you have a problem with it, delete the Internet Memes article. Or the YTMND article. --DJ the Raptor 17:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Or delete it from here. Oh, we have. Jolly good. Just zis Guy you know? 18:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
What the hell do you have against Happycat? Wait. Sratch that. What do you have against YTMND? --DJ the Raptor 22:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Seriously, think about it. The site might has a few thousand users. Outside of that, there are very few people who give a crap. It makes sense to put something in the YTMND article (only just), but otherwise it is useless. What is the significance of a joke that made a few thousand people laugh in 2006? This will and should be forgotten in a few months. --liquidGhoul 23:10, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
It's just not important enough to be included on Wikipedia. And to others on this talk page (not saying that anyone does have personal issues with YTMND), but this is not the place for you to vent your frustrations. Please deal with this issue with a neutral view. Pacific Coast Highway {blah • I'm a hot toe picker • WP:NYCS} 17:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

http://web.archive.org/web/20031029093943/http://www.happycat.ru/morda1.gif (There's Happycat's picture). Sometimes the site gives an error. Try again later if it happens. (I think the cat's name is Morda.) I claim no responsibility for finding the picture because another wikipedian found it before me. --Targetter (Lock On) 03:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

And the reliable secondary sources are?.... Just zis Guy you know? 19:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Beats the hell outta me. I just mentioned it for the sake of mentioning it. I don't want it as the picture. You know me better than that... --Targetter (Lock On) 03:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Is there any attention in reliable published sources for "NEDM/Happycat"? If so, then I definitely agree that it belongs in the YTMND article. Next, only after it shows up in cat fanciers' publications has it achieved notability vis-a-vis the breed. Hope this helps. —ptk✰fgs 04:34, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I'm growing fond of the cat that they have on this article in the French Wikipedia. —ptk✰fgs 05:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Some cute ones over at de too. —ptk✰fgs 05:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Altogether now: Aaaaaaah! :-) Just zis Guy you know? 09:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I think we should use the German article's cat. Unobstructed, cute, and more of an everyday cat than that blue one. --Targetter (Lock On) 02:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not so sure. I think the en photo is a better photo, and the cat books I have say that the blue self is pretty much the prototypical British Shorthair. —ptk✰fgs 02:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
True... besides which, "Stoic Cat" is starting to catch on. This is a fascinating discussion, by the way. --dragfyre 02:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
The blue is the most common colour for British. I have been to a few breeders, and I can't remember ever seeing white, though tabby and ginger are pretty common (still less common than blue). I will dig up a larger photo, and upload it. Don't know why I uploaded one so small, must have been on dial-up. --liquidGhoul 05:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Stoic Cat? Take off every 'link'! For Great Justice. --Targetter (Lock On) 21:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't think there should be a major talk about Happycat in this article, but I think it should be mentioned that Happycat is a British Shorthair, other than that, nothing else should be said. The town I live in has less than 4,000 people in it and it's an article on Wikipedia. Since there are so many people loving Happycat, why not just say simply "The infamous Happycat from YTMND is a famous British Shorthair". And that's it.

Bingo. I don't see why not,if it stops YTMNDers from vandalising the article.--The jazz musician 03:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

What? If they resort to vandalism, then we should not give them what they want to stop. They are too immature to persist with this, and they will eventually give up. We can talk, and try an reach concensus, but there has been no good argument to include this. As for the argument about it being valid because a town of 4000 people has an article. That town of 4000 people has had a history which has involved thousands, if not millions, of people. There is a large number of people which would find that article useful. This stupid affair is about a joke which entertained a few thousand people in 2006! Is there one article on a similar joke during 342BCE? --liquidGhoul 07:30, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Well,it's just one tiny note. I don't see the big deal anyway.At least it's not like "British shorthairs listen to Doom music,with chapstick" or whatever.--The jazz musician 15:02, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Except ... it's not even a British Shorthair. Not all cats with blue coats are British Shorthairs. —ptk✰fgs 15:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Happycat isn't a British Shorthair? What breed is it then? (serious question, I don't have any real opinions on this article re: YTMNDification or not. Although I do agree with The Jazz Musician about what harm can a single sentence do in the Famous British Shorthairs section. IF it is indeed a British Shorthair, of course) --Loccy 11:22, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
He does look remarkedly like one, but we would need references stating his breed, otherwise it is original research. --liquidGhoul 12:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
By that token, do we have a reference that categorically states the Whiskas cat is a British shorthair? In any case, do Whiskas have a single specific cat these days? --194.128.66.118 16:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Truce anyone?

I just wanted to say I think it's a shame so much energy has been spent on this page yet almost none of it has been put into anything besides adding and reverting the words NEDM and happycat. Happycat aside this is a popular breed. I think this can still be a better article. AFink 00:32, 1 September 2006 (UTC)