Talk:British Shorthair
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Cats.
This project provides a central approach to Cat-related subjects on Wikipedia. |
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
|
| Main 1 (start - 9/8/06) |
Contents |
[edit] Archive 1
I think it's about time to archive some of the trolling that happened in past months. If nobody objects, I'd like to archive all comments up to the section "It should be mentioned", and resume making productive talk about the content of the article. --Targetter (Lock On) 01:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Hmm...ok. --The jazz musician 02:06, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- If you still have something to say about one of the previous topics, just bring it back over here. We're still listening. --Targetter (Lock On) 14:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Cuddleton (talk) 08:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC) I am really really new to this and the only page I have ever edited has been this article. My edits have mostly disappeared which is disapointing. I breed British Shorthairs in Australia and own ten of them in six different colour combinations. In response to some of the comments in the archived discussion, yes blue is a very common BSH colour but they come in a rainbow of colours including white. You may not have seen one but they are listed as allowable on most registering bodies breed standards. Not many people breed just blue anymore. Now for Happycat. As a breeder I can say the Happycat image is clearly a BSH and it even has a nice ear set and a coat that cracks in all the right places. It would do okay at show if it was a registered cat. I think it is a cute image but I dont think it needs to have it's picture here. I think this page is for someone looking to research and admire the breed and not a cutesy, funny cat page. A line of text saying he resembles a BSH would do no harm though. The article as it stands barely scratches the surface of what these cats are like, where they came from and how to keep them. So I would like to add to it again because I want to share with everyone how lovely they are, happy cat or house cat!
[edit] NEDM
Until someone can produce a source that proves that that actually is British shorthair, the NEDM cat mention will be removed since it fails WP:VERIFY. pschemp | talk 03:00, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Due to the fact that Happycat is not Happycat's official mascot anymore, it is hard to find him on the site, especially if you don't know Russian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.63.82 (talk) 14:19, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] NEDM editing war
What does Wikipedia have against NEDM. I mean, after deleting articles like Brian Peppers, Limecat, Clock spider (and the list goes on), it just makes them less of a base of important imformation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Good (talk • contribs)
- first, this isn't an editing war, it is you inserting unverified information. There is no proof that that is a British Shorthair, and the consensus reached was that the information should stay out. Inserting it repeatedly is vandalism, and will be treated as such. Your comments above have nothing to do with verifiablity of facts, and instead appear to show you have a personal POV agenda. Please cease. pschemp | talk 03:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- In my assessment, the cat depicted is not a British Shorthair. It is most likely a domestic mix (domestic to Russia). Have a nice day. —ptk✰fgs 03:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- I wonder when PTKFGS became a vet.--Snake Liquid 18:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
There needs to be a mention of happycat in this article. Happycat is a british blue.
[edit] additional images
Please check these images. If they are useful to the article, please use them as you see fit. If they will not be useful, please put them up for deletion. ~ BigrTex 17:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image cleanup
The images removed from this stub were part of a cleanup to see that the article complied with WP:NOT, WP:IUP, and WP:IFD. No image removed served an encyclopedic purpose not served by an adequate infobox picture illustrating the breed's unique appearance. They crowded the text (what little of it there is) and the users adding the images seemed to do so for no other purpose than showcasing their personal pets, which is strictly forbidden. If you would like to add an image to the article, please see that it serves a clearly necessary encyclopedic purpose. Thank you VanTucky 22:39, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
I'd be interested to hear how the image removed didn't adequately represent the gender appearance differences? gazzagg75 23:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, for one, it is nearly impossible to demonstrate feline gender differences with a photo, although sex differences are another matter. To do that, we'd need closeups of cat genitals. And since they are consistent across the species, we can leave that to the 'cat' article and forget about it here. —ptk✰fgs 23:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough, I did repost this time explaining that the image represented the gender differences with regard to the males developing large cheek jowls. If it is felt that the image did not sufficiently represent this, or my discription was inaccurate perhaps you could help a new "wikipedian" out with some helpful advice. It can be frustraiting to have 50% of my contributions removed, leaving me feeling like a Wikitroll already. gazzagg75 23:43, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- We all went through the same thing. It's part of the learning process. We appreciate you wanting to make positive contributions, regardless of differences about certain edits. And FYI: for those users making real contributions to content (not just matienence) having 50% of your edits contested isn't that bad of a track record. There are several problems with that justification for the image: 1. There are no citations from reliable published sources backing the claim that males develop larger jowls. 2. the image doesn't particularly illustrate any facial differences.(from my perspective). 3. If your intent in uploading the image was to demonstrate the sex difference in the breed, why didn't you say so in the caption or license before it was removed? 4. Irregardless, having more images is not necessary to the article at this point, as it is a rather small stub that needs alot more work when it comes to factual accuracy and comprehensiveness. VanTucky 23:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Black and White British Shorthair
There is no mention of this variety in the text. As far as I know, it gained recognition as a pedigree in Victorian times. Asteriontalk 20:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Origin
the previous versions were poor because: -they might suggest that BSH is similar to cats that lived in Britain in Roman times. - omited iteresting fact about breed's develompent - some users confuse the meaning of the term 'breed of cats' Mr Bean
- Dear poster-of-the-above-remark, If you want your opinion to count please sign your posts as unsigned posts tend not to be taken seriously.
- Morgan Leigh | Talk 01:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Nearly a revert war
Greetings, There seems to be a bit of an edit war starting here. I had a look and it seems to me that the version to which I reverted today is the better of the two versions. It reads much better and has better citations than the other. I suggest that from hereon in you don't just keep reverting backwards and forward between these two versions, but rather point out any particular statements that you think could be improved and work together towards improving them. I will keep an eye out to see if I can help you arrive at a resolution. Morgan Leigh | Talk 01:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- You're right I should register. But please note that I've never "just kept reverting backwards and onwards". I've always searched compromise by taking into account other ppls' versions and explaining changes made. I've also pointed out the statements I don't agree with and You didn't refer to it. What does it mean "it reads better"? I expect You to offer a compromise version today. You may find this source interesting. http://www.petpublishing.com/catkit/breeds/british.shtml
- Especially this paragraph :
- Bad came to worse for the British shorthair during World Wars I and II. These conflicts had a detrimental effect on the cat fancy in England, and the British shorthair suffered a near fatal setback. Breeders had trouble finding suitable studs for their females. Inspired by the twin needs of convenience and survival, British shorthair fanciers resorted to outcrosses to keep the breed alive. Their restorative of choice was the Persian, whose influence eventually spawned a new kind of shorthair cat. Originally described as having "small" heads; noses "rather long than short"; "long and slender" necks; and "narrow. . . graceful" bodies, British shorthairs metamorphosed into the short-faced, close-coupled minivans in fur that they are today.Mr Bean —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.16.132.162 (talk • contribs)
-
- I would like to draw your attention to two matters. Firstly, I know I asked you to sign your posts, but I meant sign them with your own username. Although you might feel an affinity with Mr Bean, that is not your actual username. Secondly, making statements like "I expect you to offer a compromise version today" is guaranteed to produce only the response of knowing laughter. You just can't go around saying things like that on wikipedia, well not if you expect to retain any credibility. I sincerely advise you to refrain from such things and rather to apply yourself to editing articles. If you think a thing deserves to go in then put it in, just so long as you can provide suitable references. Morgan Leigh | Talk 08:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- That's what I wanted to hear. You won't oppose to a new version of the article as far as there are credible sources. I was afraid You don't read them at all. You also seem very emotional about this matter which is unnecessary and silly. Next time please respond only to the specific statements that You don't agree with. Mr Bean —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.16.132.162 (talk) 14:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- I would like to draw your attention to two matters. Firstly, I know I asked you to sign your posts, but I meant sign them with your own username. Although you might feel an affinity with Mr Bean, that is not your actual username. Secondly, making statements like "I expect you to offer a compromise version today" is guaranteed to produce only the response of knowing laughter. You just can't go around saying things like that on wikipedia, well not if you expect to retain any credibility. I sincerely advise you to refrain from such things and rather to apply yourself to editing articles. If you think a thing deserves to go in then put it in, just so long as you can provide suitable references. Morgan Leigh | Talk 08:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Breed Desc.
I removed the statement "These cats are a big breed but are very cute and cuddly." because a) it's POV, b) it's covered elsewhere in the article. --68.5.190.102 (talk) 01:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC) (forgot to sign in --Popoi (talk) 01:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC))
[edit] Addition to Name
A british Shorthair can also be referred to as a 'European' shorthair. That should be noted in the article. What do others think?PigeonPiece (talk) 22:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Cats portal
A summary of this article appears on a rotational basis in Portal:Cats under the "Selected breed" section. Any improvement to this article's lead section should be copied to the relevant entry on Portal:Cats/Selected_breed. --165.21.154.90 (talk) 06:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
