Talk:Pet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Cats
Cats Portal
This article is supported by WikiProject Cats.

This project provides a central approach to Cat-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
WikiProject Dogs
Dogs Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it needs.
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Version 0.7
 This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.

The external links at the bottom seem rather spammy, I'd delete them but would like a second oppinion. Also, do people actually keep roaches as pets or should that be removed? CugeltheClever 15:15, 5 October 2006 (UTC)CugeltheClever

Contents

[edit] Main Image

Are their any sources that say that owning a pet may actually promote a longer and happier life? RooZ 17:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

As with many things that impact health, there are numerous studies that shw different results. But in general it doea appear that pet ownership has a measurable positive difference on some aspects of health. Check out the US government's National institute of Health statement on pet ownership for a fairly good assessment of current studies. I'll add this reference to the photo caption. --Siobhan Hansa 10:25, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to see more on this subject, too. — Omegatron 23:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Objection To Pets" ; Pets and Others

i don't think this section accurately reflects peta's views. the way i understand it, peta is only opposed to pet slavery and maybe usage of the word 'pet', but not to "companionship". thus, this section suggests a conflict that does not exist. am i right? Bob A 07:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[1] [2] — Omegatron 23:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My changes

I've come across this article just now, and went through changing little things for the sake of grammar, tone, and accuracy. If there is anything I did incorrectly, be assured I did not do it out of malice, just stupidity (it's past my bedtime). One thing that I should mention is that I've made the spelling convention consistent to American spelling; if anyone opposes this, please speak out here so that we can come to a consensus on whether that or Oxford spelling should be used here. (I picked American because most of the article contained this, as well as for the sake of consistency; the article contained both spellings before I came along). After I get some sleep, I'll see if I feel like doing the review on this article. V-Man737 12:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] merge

Merge Residental pets should be merged with this its a duplicate article. Notability Crusader 06:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Merge — Omegatron 23:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. Elf | Talk 21:25, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adding a link

I work for the America's Most Wanted Safety Center, a new branch of America's Most Wanted getting away from the capturing of criminals, and branching out to all aspects of safety. I feel a link to our post about what to do with your pets in an emergency would be appropriate and mutually beneficial, and something that people looking up pets would be interested in knowing. The link is http://www.amw.com/safety/?p=51 please consider it. Jrosenfe 13:19, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

That's more of a "how-to" than an encyclopedic look at pets and disasters (for instance a study on how disasters impact pets, or how different cultures treat pets in disasters would be more encyclopedic), so I don't think it's really an appropriate link for this article. -- SiobhanHansa 14:59, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually there's some encyclopedic content there. I would support the inclusion of the link in a paragraph mentioning pets with regard to emergency situations. Domesticated animals can be on either side of the victim/rescuer divide. This is a good place to link out to our article on Rescue dogs or service dogs or whatever it's called. User:Pedant (talk) 18:04, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barking and neoteny

Wolves do in fact bark, just not as often as dogs do.

Most domesticated pets are neotenous. Any objection to my adding a sentence and a link to Neoteny.

No objection here, depending on the sentence. Is there a good reference to cite as well? User:Pedant (talk) 17:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Word Use

The word "boid" is used under the topic of exotic pets. I can't find a reference to or definition of this word which is appropriate. Is this a typo? -Athaler 20:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it's supposed to be "bird". But since it's unsourced, along with much of the text there, and definitely POV, it should probably come out if we can't find a decent notable source to attribute it to. -- SiobhanHansa 21:08, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, for the moment I changed it to "birds". If you think it should just be removed, feel free. It does need a source though. -Athaler 15:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I think boids is an incorrect way to refer to boas and pythons. Maybe this is what was meant? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.53.33 (talk) 22:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Koko mourned"

mourned for several days

I am a bit uncomfortable with this as it stands without a good reference... Unless Koko told someone who wrote it down, we cannot know her state of mind, and mourning is primarily a state of mind.

Koko's behaviour should be stated, rather than that Koko, "mourned", 'mourn' is as far as I can research, not a 'word' in Koko's 'lexicon'. How did she convey that she was 'mourning'?

What reference says 'mourned'?

I would appprove a more descriptive "appeared distraught" "behaved in an uncharacteristically subdued manner" or something with less of what can't be shown directly by reference but is an assumption of Koko's 'state of mind'. Any suggestions ? User:Pedant (talk) 17:53, 10 April 2008 (UTC)