This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of 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.CatsWikipedia:WikiProject CatsTemplate:WikiProject CatsCats articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
On 29 January 2022, it was proposed that this article be
moved. The result of
the discussion was not moved.
Catloaf was nominated for
deletion.
The discussion was closed on 26 March 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were
merged into
Cats and the Internet. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see
its history; for its talk page, see
here.
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 13 December 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Tuj56364.
Thanks for the support. I don't particularly want to create this article, but I think somebody else should. I added some more sources to the pile to sweeten the deal. :)--
Coin945 (
talk)
19:58, 1 October 2015 (UTC)reply
I wasn't the one who create this article. I simply provided the links above. i think that first sentence is currently a dumping ground for all the reliable sources.--
Coin945 (
talk)
06:37, 2 October 2015 (UTC)reply
I did it that way because I could create it, pretty much with just that one line, and it made it almost impossible to speedy or AFD, it showed that it was genuinely notable.
None of those first eleven references are currently being used anywhere else in the article. Let's dump them here instead: (sources were removed by @
Coin945: as they have now been added to the article) --
McGeddon (
talk)
14:11, 4 October 2015 (UTC)reply
I check pages listed in
Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for
orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of
Cats on the Internet's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not.
AnomieBOT⚡01:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Is the scope of this article expected to stop at "cat images and videos on the internet" (which is what the sources seem to focus on), or can this article be meaningfully expanded to cover other forms of contact between cats and the internet (which is what the current title implies)? --
McGeddon (
talk)
16:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)reply
I think it goes beyond the narrower scope of cat media and looks at the unique and unprecidented relationship between the internet and cats that have catapulted the latter into superstardom. At least thats how the myth goes. In any case, @
Piotrus:, did you want to try your hand at helping us improve the article? Exracting info from all those sources and creating an article that looks and feels encyclopedic will take a bit of work. But the good news is that theres a diamond in the rough just waiting to be smoothed out. :)--
Coin945 (
talk)
13:59, 4 October 2015 (UTC)reply
It seems to me that the current title is too wide, it sounds like it's about the network that is the Internet, and felines that are house cats, as separate things. And the title 'Cat media on the Internet' implies it's about the media, and not about any of the cats that have become famous because of the Internet, so it's about specific videos only- it's too specific.
GliderMaven (
talk)
17:51, 4 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Which aspects of the article content aren't covered by "cat media on the internet", in the current version? I thought Bonsai Kitten might be tangential, but its article actually makes the point that "BonsaiKitten.com's pictures are the source of its controversy." - and a website about cats is "cat media" in any case. --
McGeddon (
talk)
20:06, 4 October 2015 (UTC)reply
I created the history and psychology sections alone. I did not add any of those sections about famous Internet cats/memes etc. (although I did add a bit about nyan cat once I saw that the section was here to stay). So baring just my sections in mind, I think it is less about listing and more about analyzing.--
Coin945 (
talk)
02:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Of course, there could be two articles:
The Internet and cats to analyse this relationship and why it exists, and
Cat media on the Internet, which simply lists all the popular cat-related media. So this article would split in half: History and Psychology staying here, and the rest going to the new article.--
Coin945 (
talk)
14:23, 5 October 2015 (UTC)reply
But the history and psychology sections are entirely about the history and psychology of cat videos and cat pictures. There's nothing else. Since this rename doesn't seem cut and dried, I'll go ahead and open up a formal discussion. --
McGeddon (
talk)
15:38, 6 October 2015 (UTC)reply
You're probably right. I don't really have a preference for the article title, just as long as it describes the content adequately. Go ahead with the name change. :)--
Coin945 (
talk)
16:06, 6 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Virtually nobody would ever, ever, use, off their own bat, 'cat media on the Internet' to find this article. You're supposed to use the name that people would search for, not the 'rightest' name. Even the current name is better than that.
GliderMaven (
talk)
20:51, 6 October 2015 (UTC)reply
I started a requested move discussion at the bottom of this page. If it is moved, "The Internet and cats" will redirect there; we should probably redirect
Cat videos and similar phrases to wherever this article ends up, as well. --
McGeddon (
talk)
23:11, 6 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Yes, this topic most definitely deserves an article too. For some bizarre reason, there is a whole culture around how your preference for one animal or another is some determinant for a large part of your behavior and personality - kind of like horoscopes. It's weird. And very notable:
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The Internet and cats → Cat media on the Internet – The article is purely about cat videos and cat pictures, and the cats who became famous through these videos and pictures. It is not about cats who use the internet, or text-based cat-related websites, or how internet-enabled technology affects cats, or anything else like that (and probably shouldn't be, given how much detail can be gone into about cat images and videos alone).
McGeddon (
talk)
15:43, 6 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose - the suggested new title is unnatural, inaccurate, overprecise and not very concise. The purpose of the article is not to discuss the media (video and audio files), it's for all coverage of cats on the internet. It's similar to saying 'words about cats on the Internet', we're not interested in the words, nor are we specifically interested in the media. Although all coverage of cats is contained in media, that's not the focus of the article.
GliderMaven (
talk)
15:23, 7 October 2015 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Holy cat
This article has come quite a long way in quality since its beginning stages less than two (2) weeks ago.
Editors who've participated in this Quality improvement effort are to be catmmended.
The History and Psychology sections were mine. Your praise is very touching; thankyou. @
Cirt:, as a prolific editor of Wikipedia, would you like to try your hand at improving the article? The sources have not yet been mined for all their juicy info, and the current text isn't structured as well as it could be. :)--
Coin945 (
talk)
05:07, 14 October 2015 (UTC)reply
List of cats mains here for 'Cats who gained internet fame', so that's not a duplication. It wouldn't be appropriate to add any of this to
Cat (aka
Domestic cat- same article). Cultural depictions of cats already links to this also, it wouldn't be appropriate to go into this much depth there either. It does seem to be a legitimate topic in its own right, and has been covered by lots of reliable sources.
GliderMaven (
talk)
00:10, 18 October 2015 (UTC)reply
As writer of the History and Psychology sections, I agree with Gilderman. @
Otterathome:, you seem like a very intelligent human being; perhaps you could take a peek throguh the sources in the article (or even those on the talk page that I haven't gotten around to yet), and help me to nab every last piece of juicy information? I have only done shallow readings of each source and pulled out just enoguh to justify the sources' inclusion in the article. I'm sure if we work together we can create something really great. :)--
Coin945 (
talk)
10:19, 19 October 2015 (UTC)reply
A perusal of the sources, including well respected news sources like The Guardian suggests that this is a suitable standalone topic documenting a bizarre but genuinely significant pop culture phenomenon. It would be wrong to include this information in
cat or
list of cats, as those articles are geared towards the biology and anthropology, and we should defer to more general purpose topics rather than specific ones such as
Bonzai Kitten.
Ritchie333(talk)(cont)10:49, 27 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Fair-use images
I removed a bunch of fair-use images that had not been justified for use in this article (See
WP:NFLISTS; although this is not strictly a list article the logic is, I think, the same). Please be careful to use free images in this article in the future.
Daniel Case (
talk)
17:10, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
I am introducing this discussion here also for a unified resolution. There is debate on the
Oh Long Johnson article
talk page as to whether the cat is in fact called Old Long Johnson or Oh Long Johnson. Please resolve this debate for consistency and either: Move the other article or, rename the cat in this article. Thank you.
KING (
talk)
06:28, 25 November 2016 (UTC)reply
I've no idea if I'm "right" here, I just edited it to match the sources, which all said "Oh Long Johnson" and didn't give any sort of name for the cat. --
McGeddon (
talk)
12:03, 25 November 2016 (UTC)reply
We won't hold it against you. As it happens, I agree with you and was questioning the name of the cat days ago (see article history notes). Now all anyone needs is those pesky references for South Park, do those even exist?! In my mind, South Park *never* gets referenced. Anyhow, thank you.
KING (
talk)
12:15, 25 November 2016 (UTC)reply
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator comment: Yep, in the least, I'm starting to see the amount of fire figuratively caused by my lack of proposing an actual title. @
The Tips of Apmh: Would you be okay if I withdraw this move request? (Asking you as the sole participant besides myself who has not stated "oppose".)
Steel1943 (
talk)
06:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Remove Floppa
This article is focused on domestic cats, and as Floppa is a
caracal, I'm not sure it belongs in this article. I won't necessarily deny his fame (though that could be argued), so potentially this should be moved elsewhere? He's listed under 'Images' in
List of Internet phenomena already, if that's enough.
I think that there could be a case made to include Floppa with cats - but the specific wording of 'domestic cat' laid out in the beginning of the article is what's throwing me off. He's the only animal that isn't a domestic cat in this article - that I can see - which makes it feel more iffy.
I would also probably be inclined to remove him from celebrities and leave him just in internet memes - though I'm personally not overly concerned by that. <>=<
AnteaterStim (
talk)
13:59, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Since from what I can tell, 98% of his popularity is as a meme, I'd be fine with removing his entry here. Problem is, other people tend to argue to include all of their particular favorites which makes trimming this article difficult. Happy editing,
SilverTiger12 (
talk)
14:39, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
I've removed him from the celebrities section and moved the information into his Internet memes section. I do feel 50/50 on removing him entirely, since he doesn't technically fit being a domestic cat, but also does hold significance.
AnteaterStim (
talk)
07:17, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply