Talk:Maine Coon

"comment"??

Most people do not believe this but in the early mid 1990s I had a 1/2 breed coon cat. We called him Scooter. Now what i want to say has to do with the reading I did aboutt the breed. Bio-bassed but impossible is the sub heading (or something like that). I disagree... I would take my kids down the riveway and wait for the school bus befor work. My oldest was 17 and 1 day we were talking and walking the younger kids down the drive and happened upon a familey of skunks. 1 Parent and 3 or 4 kittens, we stopped just to be safe and I commented that 1 of the kittens seemed odd. My oldest agreed and once the way was safe we looked at the soft sand beside the drive aand 1 skunk kitten had double paws on the front or so it looked. I tracked the odd prints to the edge of the field to make sure it was not just an illusion with all the paws prints. It was not! It was a double pawed skunk Kitten. My cat had breed with the skunk... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.224.243.248 (talk) 16:26, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

"Rectangular"??

"Maine Coons possess a rectangular body shape". What does this mean? Although some cats have longer torsos and some shorter, IMHO the degree of "rectangularity" of all cats is about the same. What's notable about Maine Coons? -- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 15:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

If you look at all of the breed standards listed in the infobox, you'll notice that Maine Coons are to possess a "rectangular" body shape (i.e., a long torso). I'm only going by what the sources tell me. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 16:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

We should either clearly say in the article what "rectangular" means in this context, or avoid using the term, or make plain in the article that "The breed standard says that MCs are to have a "rectangular" body shape", but we don't really know what that means. (I suppose that my concern comes under WP:JARGON - if we use some odd term that specialists understand, we should define it for the general reader.) -- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 19:18, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I honestly don't see how WP:JARGON comes into play here. The word "rectangle" isn't a subject-specific term. The average reader knows what a rectangle looks like and I'm sure has enough common sense to know how the shape would pertain to a feline. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 20:30, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I also seem to lack the common sense to grasp what "rectangular" might mean in this context. Your comment "(i.e., a long torso)" suggests that a non-rectangular body would probably be a rather quadratic one. This might make sense, as before reading your comment I was wondering how a non-rectangular, or less(?) rectangular body would be shaped then. Circular? Triangular? Something else? It might not directly be WP:JARGON, but it seems pretty close. A description along the lines of "long torso" would certainly be more enlightening than "rectangular". 84.112.183.24 (talk) 21:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why Jargon would apply here because it's used in the context of a quote.--Marhawkman (talk) 23:54, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Check the breed description of its nearest equivalent, the Norwegian Forest Cat. That one, due to its shorter forelegs, has a triangular body shape. The 'rectangular body shape' is a shorthand for 'longer than tall, with the spine parallel to the floor when standing at rest'. Mvdwege (talk) 10:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Ownership

I have been reading the discussion on this page and it does seem like that Ms. Sarita is trying to own the page.--68.19.210.175 (talk) 23:47, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Own? no. But she is doing a good job of monitoring it. :)--Marhawkman (talk) 06:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

This is one of the many reasons I have abandoned this article. The accusations of ownership and the hostility were outrageous. I have not been on WP in months, yet am still having the "ownership" label thrown my way. Are my comments on this discussion page overwhelmingly abundant? Yes. Because I spent hours on this article and knew the sources and information by heart. Some people love to point fingers but failed to have anything to do with the actual revision of the article. It was all (and still quite is) rather interesting. I hope that others will continue to monitor this page for its own well-being. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 08:15, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I've always liked your input. I would rather see you continue to help.--Marhawkman (talk) 21:12, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Marhawkman. Your input and help on this article have been excellent. I hope you continue to keep it updated and possibly improve it even more! – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 19:33, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Shedding

Do these types of cats shed badly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.121.141.34 (talk) 20:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Maine coons typically have a lot of season variation to their coat length so they do usually shed heavily in spring/summer.219.89.178.160 (talk) 07:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

In otherwords, yes, very much so. Winter coat changing to summer coat means that all the long hairs fall out.--Marhawkman (talk) 08:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Curiously, I had a male Main Coon while I was growing up and he had a great deal of shedding. The female Main Coon that I now have sheds very little, even during the Summer. The reasons for this are not entirely known, just speculations, therefor the article does not mention much about the topic of shedding.Mdriver1981 (talk) 02:19, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, shedding is done as a response to summer heat. If the cat stays in a well cooled house it won't need to shed.--Marhawkman (talk) 23:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I have heard that short-haired domestic cats actually shed as much as the long hairs, except it is less noticeable because of the length of the hair. I have had both a female Maine Coon (great amount of shedding, but a healty cat) and a short-haired standard-model tabby (which is supposed to shed less), and I think there's some truth to this. I've also heard that a cat will shed when passing close to a TV screen (the older CRTs) because its brain thinks it is summertime (because of the light), triggering this response.Cortina2 (talk) 18:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I heard a different version. that they shed more next to a tv beause of the static charge on the screen.--Marhawkman (talk) 21:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Zico image

I recently replaced this image with another one of an orange Maine Coon kitten, which I think is useful as it shows the different color variations rather than having every image of black/brown MCs. The existing image was way washed out and didn't add anything to the article. Given that my change was reverted by an single purpose account so that a picture of their cat could remain, I'm taking it here. I'd like to get consensus on this so we can move forward.--Terrillja _talk 15:27, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd rather have the pic of the orange kitten. IF I had to choose. it could probably be rearranged to include both though. The tufting illustration is kinda cool.--Marhawkman (talk) 21:02, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Terrillja, I would like for us to get along. I ask that you please compromise and drop your mission to remove this image, which I believe is one of the better ones on the Maine Coon page. Note that Marhawkman said that he would rather have both images, and not that this image be necessarily removed. I don't wish to escalate this, and I don't have the time to fight (but I will if I have to), which is why I have kept my responses contained to the previous revert comments. I would like to resolve this peacefully and amicably if at all possible. I have made a proposed edit that includes both images. Zicoon (talk) 06:48, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Then you could have used the talkpage in the two months that this has been here. Yet instead you waited until I removed it again to actually say anything.Wikipedia is not a battleground, I want what is best for the article, which would be to include different images that cover the different looks of the breed. And the image is out of focus and washed out. Hardly one of the best images in the article. Sorry, but constructive criticism here. I still think that the image is not contributing to the article and will probably take it to the conflict of interest noticeboard, since you have consistently pushed for your cat to be included with clear bias.--Terrillja _talk 19:16, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Terrillja: I really don't understand the basis of your claims. The image is not out of focus. It is not washed out (I just removed the blue cast at the rear of the image if that is what you were referring to as being washed out). Your opinion may be that the image is not contributing to this article, but we have already gone through this and several people have stated otherwise. Your conflict of interest allegations are incorrect. And unlike yourself, I simply do not have a lot of time to spend on the internet, nor on Wikipedia. Nor do I usually bother to log-in whenever I make an edit (Wikipedia does not require you to log in to make an edit), I only got my userid because of the requirement to be logged in to upload a photo. I'm an accommodating and generally nice person - Instead of trying to remove your photo, I found a tidy way to include it also (as also suggested above by Marhawkman). Can you please be accommodating also? I don't wish for this to be a "battle", so can we please end this? It would be nice if we could all peacefully coexist here. Also, please remember that I also have the best interest of this article in mind and have contributed valuable content beyond the photo. Marhawkman: I'm not sure if I've said this previously, but thank-you for being friendly and supportive. Zicoon (talk) 10:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Are we seriously still having this photo debate? I apologize for intruding, but from my previous encounters with this same argument (and the same photo), my stance is still solid. The image provides nothing "special" to the article.

• The featured image: A spectacular, professional-looking photo, displaying fine qualities of the breed.
• The close up of the Maine Coon face gives defined detail of facial features.
• The picture of Cosey is placed well in the "History" section.
• The photo of the two cats sitting side by side is a good example of comparing the size of a Maine Coon with other breeds.
• The gorgeous photo of the silver tabby and the white Maine Coon shows the variety of colors of this breed.
• The orange tabby is the only kitten photo in the article.

The photo provided by Zico and Wo0ter08 really do not provide anything special to the article (despite the fact that the cats in them are absolutely stunning), yet these users have issued the most difficulty when getting this matter resolved. We all want what's best for the article. This has nothing to do with myself or Terrillja trying to prevent users from uploading pictures of their own cats. We have now resorted to "sandwiching" text between photos (a no no) in order to accommodate these users' preferences for their photos to be in the article. Is that what we really want? To sacrifice the reliability and quality of this article for two images? Okay then.

– Ms. Sarita ^Confer 04:42, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree. I like looking at cat pictures as much as the next man but these two images aren't even particularly interesting or striking photographs. Barry Wom (talk) 15:25, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

As Zicoon appears to be active again but has decided to ignore the talkpage, I will leave them a message, if they don't have a compelling reason to keep the article as is, I will remove the two images in 24 hours per the consensus here.--Terrillja _talk 03:17, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that Zicoon made that edit to the article also, yet s/he has ignored the ongoing discussion. It would be appreciative if s/he would address what we have discussed here instead of simply making a slight edit that is only a small bandage to a large wound. The text is still sandwiched (at least on my PC it is) and still looks cluttered. It just, unfortunately, looks awkward to have so many spectacular, good-quality photos surrounding a picture that looks so washed out (yeah, I said it). I vaguely remember asking Zicoon to take a better quality photo of his/her pet to match that of the others, but being shot down (maybe I'm mistaken)? If I am mistaken, Zicoon, what is the possibility of this? I would also like to get Marhawkman's current opinion on this as well (since he may not be aware of the new dialogue that has taken place over the past couple days). – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 06:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

As you can see above, they ignored the discussion for 2 months, so until someone does something, they will likely just continue to ignore it. I think taking action to elicit a response is the only way that anything will happen here, unfortunately.--Terrillja _talk 19:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

worst case scenario we can stuff the extra pictures in a gallery box... Actually I've been tempted to do that for some time....--Marhawkman (talk) 17:41, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Well WP:IG would appear to be contrary to that idea FWIW.--Terrillja _talk 06:32, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't see it. The point of the gallery in this case would be to illustrate the variety of coat types and colors that the breed can be found in. That cannot be done with a single picture. We've been having issues doing it with 6 pictures..... Thus a gallery is warranted.--Marhawkman (talk) 14:49, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Terrillja & Ms. Sarita: Please stop repeatedly trying to remove this photo. Your reasons for doing so are personal and biased opinions not shared by all. We have gone through this over and over. Please accept that not everyone shares your views. That photo has received support from several people and is very fitting for an encyclopedic entry. In addition to showing what a summer coat looks like, it shows the body, head, face, and front paws from an angle not present in any of the other photos. It is the only photo that shows the head and face from the top and side. It is an excellent photo for this entry. And, as it happens, brown tabby Maine Coons are the most common type. As I've already said: This photo is not washed out, and I believe it is one of the better ones on the Maine Coon page. I would like this to end peacefully and amicably. Zicoon (talk) 03:35, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Are you serious? How in the world are our reasons "personal and biased"? We have provided valid reasons for removing this photo. If anything, your reasoning is completely personal and biased since it is your cat in the photo. Not to mention that you have showed little interest if and when another photo is removed from the article...the only participation we have seen out of you on the Maine Coon page is when your photo is taken out. So, please don't point fingers. Not everyone shares your view either, and others have also showed support for its removal, so your point is a moot one, at best. I can't even see the cat's face, and the fact that it is the only photo that shows the cat from the top and side is entirely irrelevant regarding encyclopedic quality. I'm sorry, but the photo is washed out and is, in my opinion, one of the worst and least interesting photos on the page. You want this to end "peacefully and amicably" by the rest of us dropping the subject and letting the photo stay as is. I've asked that maybe a better quality photo be taken of this cat, and you have ignored my request. You've blanked your talk page in which Terrillja requested that you provide a compelling reason (which you have yet to provide) for the image to stay. We have tried to reason with you and compromise but noooooo. It's your way or the frickin' highway. Yeah. Real peaceful. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 06:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Removed images per here, if Zicoon revers, they go to WP:COIN, as they clearly have a conflict of interest and have ignored others to push their image into the article.--Terrillja _talk 06:32, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Image:Tabby.jpg I have found a much better image of a tabby Maine Coon with a summer coat. What does everyone think? – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 07:43, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

It's far superior. Barry Wom (talk) 13:05, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

You can't be serious. The zico summer coat photo really added details to this page. Washed out should not be an issue? It needs to be put back. What's with the major hostility? With your logic maybe you should find a new kitten photo, its not looking at the camera and the photo is oddly cropped. Same with the silver tabby, its tail is unfortunately cropped off. 174.6.10.134 (talk) 10:08, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

The zico picture was a poorly taken photograph from above of a cat lolling on the carpet which added nothing to the article. Who would want to view a picture of the rear of a cat's head and its back ? This isn't an article on cat anatomy after all. There's no close-up picture of a Maine Coon's genitals either - by *your* logic that would presumably add useful "detail" to the article. (Or should that be "details" ?)

P.S. Silver Tabby picture has been reframed. Barry Wom (talk) 13:05, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

That zico photo was appropriate...it should really go back up. I think all the negative commentary above is unnecessarily opinionated.24.25.249.248 (talk) 04:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Hmm ... two page edits which have restored the zico photo and two comments in support of the image from anonymous I.P. addresses, neither of which have made any other contributions to WP. I wonder who could be behind this, m'dears ? Barry Wom (talk) 10:39, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I still think we should do a gallery...--Marhawkman (talk) 16:34, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I have been quiet because I am way too busy right now with much more pressing responsibilities and don't have the time at the moment (and possibly not for quite a while) to properly defend against these attacks. But let me be clear: I am independent of anyone else here. I am however grateful to the other people who are standing up to these attacks (which is what they are). I am going to side with Marhawkman: If we need a gallery here to keep things respectful, then let's add a gallery. Using false accusations, untrue statements, and poor reasoning to justify removing photos to add new ones should not be tolerated. Zicoon (talk) 18:51, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I also vote against having a gallery. Please read WP:IG, specifically the passage stating, "...Wikipedia is not an image repository. A gallery is not a tool to shoehorn images into an article..." "Shoehorning" images into the article is exactly what we would be doing.

Zicoon, you are mistaking construction criticism for "attacks". No one is attacking you. We have tried to work with you and have tried to compromise (without sacrificing the quality of this GA article) so that we can include a photo of your cat or include a photo of a Maine Coon with a summer coat, but to no avail. No attacks have been made (by either side). This is called a debate. I have proposed two possible fixes: (1) Find/Take another photo of your Maine Coon that is of better quality or (2) implement the photo that I have found that still displays the summer coat of Maine Coons without sacrificing the quality of the photo. If you have another suggestion, I am completely open to hearing it and discussing it, as I always have.

It is sad that we are, yet again, arguing about this. This is not the first time we have battled on the discussion page of this article. The first time we did so, you alone prevented the article from reaching GA status for a long time, which irritated me because I felt that you truly weren't looking out for the article's best interests, but instead, your own. I hope that this isn't the case and that we can resolve this soon. You (still) have yet to provide answers to either Terrillja's or my questions (regarding how our reasons for the photo's removal are "personal and biased" or providing a compelling reason for the image to stay when two experienced editors have voted against it). You have also failed to provide any type of proposal as to how this debate can end with everyone satisfied, not just yourself. I pride myself on my patience, but eventually, this is going to have to end. Can we at least agree on that? – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 01:05, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I feel that I have to come in to this discussion and speak out in reference to my prior edit/discussion comment regarding the Zico photograph being appropriate, as I was under the impression that the spirit of Wikipedia was that all contributions of good quality information would be accepted in good faith. I was a little taken aback that someone would just very quickly not only negate what I had done, but insinuate that I was colluding with others and not contributing my own personal creative and artistic opinions regarding the photograph. It is very apparent to me that there are a few people on this page who are working closely in conjunction with each other to make unilateral decisions about it's content. I am wholeheartedly in support of editing incorrect information, yet the value which can be drawn from a photograph is highly subject to opinion. Claiming that a photograph is of no encyclopedic worthiness is a heavy claim and should never be made by just a handful of people. The Zico photograph is of good quality and is more beneficial to this article than the photos which replaced it. With the goal of having an amicable and reasonable conclusion to this situation, I propose that the photograph be included/restored as there is no basis other than a personal bias of a few friends who have their own personal agenda for it's removal. 24.25.249.248 (talk) 03:53, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

To the anon user above: Yes, the spirit of Wikipedia is to collaborate with other editors to create and improve articles. This specific image has been a problem since I completely revised the article nearly two years ago. Frankly, until your last response, your "opinions" have consisted of two sentences only telling people who oppose the photo that we are wrong to think so. I'm glad to have read a more in-depth response from you. Buuuuut...I am not working with anyone. I worked on this article by myself and never asked for, nor was I offered, any assistance. Your accusation about people "working closely in conjunction with each other" and a "few friends" operating under "personal bias" about this photo is about as valid as the accusation made by another user above about you "colluding with others", so please don't point fingers.

Please let me ask you a few questions:

(1) When looking at the other images in the article, you cannot possibly claim that the Zico image is of equal quality, can you?

(2) You, and Zicoon, have both accused myself and others of having a "personal agenda" for the image's removal. I believe I have asked this before, but what in the world is this personal bias that I seem to have?

(3) To both you and Zicoon (as I have asked Zicoon several times before): What resolution do you propose so that everyone will be satisfied? You and Zicoon have stated that the image stay, as is, making it seem as if there is little, if any, room for negotiations. I, however, have given a couple different options, but have been blatantly ignored. Why? Is it your way or the highway?

An "amicable" (a word both you and Zicoon have used) conclusion? Perhaps you both should look up the definition of that word. I have been nothing but compromising and willing to work with Zicoon. Obviously, I'm being taken for a fool.

– Ms. Sarita ^Confer 18:49, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Here's a suggestion to everyone: every time you add a comment here to further this waste-of-time, you spend as much effort to improve the article text. If you do that, by the end of this discussion, we might actually have a better article.--Dodo bird (talk) 05:02, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I really hope you're not speaking to me. I guess when you say "everyone", you are. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 18:49, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I think you've contributed more than enough to the article to get a pass.--Dodo bird (talk) 20:04, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I think this article fits the criteria for a gallery perfectly. It has a wide variety of pictures that show different aspects of the subject. The dispute is about omitting a picture primarily due to lack of room.--Marhawkman (talk) 15:04, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

To Ms. Sarita: Use of the same words is indicative of agreement with those words. In response to your questions: (1) I am indeed claiming that. The Zico photo is at least as good as or better than most of the photos, including your two new photos. (2) Your personal bias is apparent by your repeated abrasive behavior, double standards when comparing the Zico photo to other photos, and claims of deficiencies in the Zico photo which simply do not hold up upon inspection. A white background is not the same as being "washed out". The subject of the Zico photo is not in the least bit "washed out". The face in the Cosey photo however is washed out. I can barely see it. The Zico photo is not in the least bit "out of focus" (said by Terrillja). However the face in your Tabby photo above is out of focus, and to call it "far superior" (said by Barry) makes it apparent to me that a personal agenda is being pushed. (3) Respect that other people have opinions that differ from yours. Having your new photos and the Zico photo all stay in the article is a compromise. Removing photos that others prefer or oppose removing to make room for photos that you prefer is not. The article will not look too crowded with photos with this compromise. Adding one photo beyond that may start pushing it though, and if it came to that, or if a majority felt that the photos are too crowded, a gallery can be added as part of a further compromise. If you still think that a gallery is against the rules, please quote the specific rule that would prohibit it. The way I see it, if other articles have galleries, so can this one. I see no rule that precludes a gallery here. I also agree with Dodo bird that this is a waste-of-time. It’s time for the warring to end. I'm stepping aside, so please don't try to drag me deeper into this. Please accept my proposed compromise though; I believe it to be fair to all involved in this dispute. 24.25.249.248 (talk) 07:51, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Cosey is a unique historical photo. Zico is not. As WP:IG specifically prohibits the use of galleries to shoehorn images into articles against consensus, a gallery would not be appropriate, and there is not enough space for more images than the current ones. The images should reflect the whole breed, not just brown and black cats, so no, your "compromise" of just ignoring everything said above and putting the image back in isn't going to happen. As has been said a number of times, state why you think the image in significant. Justify its use with something other than witch hunt rhetoric and a clear conflict of interest. Wikipedia isn't about making you feel warm and cuddly, it's about making the best articles, using the best images available and using them in line with guidelines. One person's opinion does not override the defended and reasoned consensus of the rest. --Terrillja _talk 12:59, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Anon user: First of all...two new photos? I proposed one new photo which would potentially replace the Zico image, but which would still convey what Zicoon would like to see portrayed (i.e., a summer coat). Second of all, how in the world is being "abrasive" conclusive of me having a "personal agenda"? Furthermore, I did not ask you how you came to the conclusion that I have a "personal agenda". I asked what this "personal agenda" is. I am still awaiting an answer, so that I may judge for myself whether there is a subconscious "personal agenda" going on in my head...

As far as the Cosey photo goes, the image is a digital copy of a photograph taken over a century ago, and is (as Terrillja stated) of historical value. The Zico image was taken within the last decade (I presume) with digital imaging. There is no comparison. Regarding the size comparison photo, I have stated reasons (and it has been argued by other users already). We definitely need to find a better one, but the photo in place is the only one that displays just how large Maine Coons are, which is a notable trait of the breed. This brings up a good point, one which you and Zicoon fail to understand: An image should not only be of decent quality, it also should bring something to the article that the other images do not (see my list above). As I have said before (over and over again), the Zico image (as well as the other image which was removed) brings nothing spectacular to the article.

Having to add Zico's photo alongside a new photo is overkill and is not, in any way, compromising. The debate is to remove or keep Zicoon's image. If we keep the Zico image, where's the compromise? I could care less about the photo I submitted for approval. I thought that Zicoon's reasoning was to display a Maine Coon with a summer coat, so I found a photo that is better (yes, again, I said it). If this is not Zicoon's reasoning, then the personal bias is clearly on him/her, as well as on yourself.

Right now, the article looks perfect. Pertinent images are spaced out and are not "drowning out" the text. If Zicoon would like to have an image of a summer coat, I believe that it is completely reasonable, and we'll work on getting an image of a summer coat in there. Remember that this is a GA article. Standards are held higher. I have quoted why a gallery would be frowned upon on the Maine Coon page above.

Finally, I am not "dragging" you into anything. You "dragged" yourself into this the moment you gave your opinion. You, I assume, are an adult. You are free to make your own decisions about whether or not you want to be "dragged" into this. I have no control over what you say or do.

– Ms. Sarita ^Confer 19:23, 26 August 2010 (UTC)