Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cat lover culture

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus defaulting to Keep and w/o prejudice to a future renomination. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:30, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cat lover culture[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:SYNTH. Sources do not discuss "cat lover culture" as a distinct phenomenon. In the past we would have called this WP:CRUFT. jps (talk) 18:05, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify This is actually a real thing. It just needs to be sourced correctly. Trillfendi (talk) 18:09, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Deletenot seeing a lot of notability, looks a bit made up (do any of the sources actually discus a cat lover culture?).Slatersteven (talk) 18:47, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:36, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete delete delete, oh wow. I dare say that all beloved species have "people" (dog people, bird people, horse people, mole people, etc.), and I would argue that combining an "[animal] people" phrase with the sexist cat lady stereotype does not prove a distinct "culture" by any stretch of the imagination. Neither do cat-themed shirts and coffee mugs. I also fail to see how cat people having distinct personalities (supposedly) from dog people counts as a culture. Sure, furry culture might be a thing, but that is much more well-documented than a few cute words used by cat fans on instagram. If this wishy washy topic did stick, I think it would need to have sourcing so hefty and immaculate that the harshest deletionist would agree with keeping it. Perhaps some of the material would work on a cats in film and media page/list, or even the cat lady page. 31.54.34.61 (talk) 05:17, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Absolutely cruft. A few sentences could be included at Human interaction with cats but this is not a notable encyclopedic topic. Reywas92^Talk 03:21, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is indeed a culture that surrounds people and their interaction with cats. Karl Twist (talk) 08:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I gotta go with Karl Twist here. There is plenty to be said on this topic, beyond what's in Human interaction with cats. Here's another cite pointing out an economic angle. Bondegezou (talk) 11:00, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 21:24, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are sources for this. For example, here's a book on the topic. Other books covering it include The Lion in the Living Room: How House Cats Tamed Us and Took Over the World and Cat World. Andrew D. (talk) 00:22, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I read part of the CNN article referenced in the article, that clearly a reliable source giving significant coverage to this subject. Other sources about as well. Dream Focus 02:23, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:43, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:42, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Selective merge. The article is largely supported by crap sources ("pawesome," gag me) and does not make a strong case for a discrete topic of "cat lover culture". However, our current article on Human interaction with cats is very statistical and clinical in a way that may benefit from sources on humans' affinity for cats. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:41, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Roscelese. Hi there. There would better sources around if we all work to find them. Please just take a moment to think of this. While Human Interaction with cats may seem a place to merge this with, it doesn't represent what's going on in the world today. Believe me when I tell you this, there is an actual almost cat religion going on out there with many people. There are cat-fanatics out there. There are people who's life revolves around cats, as well as those people who just enjoy belonging to the cat scene. There is indeed a cat lover culture going on. No matter how strange it may seem to some of us or how we can't fathom the fanaticism that exists, there's the reality of what exists and to those people on the extreme end of the scale and the others at the milder end, it's real and they are part of the culture! BTW: This is a just a brief mention in The Travel, Jan 25, 2019 here but it may give an idea. Cat themed cruises where people "can meet fellow cat lovers and join a bunch of cat parties". Also in CNN, December 19, 2016: There is a "Cat culture" that flourishes online. See, it's more than human interaction with cats, it's interaction with other cat lovers / fanatics. There's a part of the culture. Karl Twist (talk) 13:23, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Further to my last post above, There is a game called Cat-Opoly which is based on the board game Monopoly. With this game, cat lovers can buy cats instead of properties. See Bustle, Apr 12 2018 - Cat-Opoly, A Cat-Themed Monopoly Game, Is So Adorable That You Might Not Be Able To Finish The Game By Megan Grant, Metro, Friday 18 Dec 2015 - Cat-Opoly is like Monopoly, but better because you buy cats instead of houses - Francesca Kentish and OK!, Tuesday, January 02, 2018 - Cat Monopoly is now a thing - and it's the perfect board game for animal lovers By Miranda Knox At present there are 480 reviews for the game on Amazon. How can there not be a cat lover culture ??? Karl Twist (talk) 15:31, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and integrate selected parts into other pages, as suggested above. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 10:54, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.