Talk:Belling the Cat

The Mice in Council

The article pretends to quote Aesop's fable The Mice in Council, but what is quoted is actually Æsop. Fables, retold by Joseph Jacobs. This is relevant because Jeff Edwards' article (reference 3) relies on the assumption that the last sentence (the morale) isn't an original part of Aesop's fable. Wouldn't it be better to quote wikisource:The Mice in Council, a 1887 translation, instead of an embellished "retold" version?--87.162.48.111 (talk) 14:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Tom and Jerry cartoon Who'll Bell the Cat? comes up with a solution: give the bell as a gift to the cat. So the solution is not "difficult (or impossible)" but rather required something along the lines of The Cock and the Jewel.--BruceGrubb (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, the stated explanation of the moral is completely wrong. The point is *not* that the task is difficult (if it were, would we really need such a metaphor?). The point of the story is that for the good of the group, one member must perform a risky task when it would be in his best interest to wait and let someone else do it, yet if every member adopted this position, then the task would certainly remain undone.

Just because some online dictionary says so, don't mean it's true.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.180.79 (talk) 02:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

The following discussion 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.

Note: the following was originally located at Talk:The Bell and the Cat. Airplaneman ✈ 15:58, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article has a considerable overlap with Bell the cat. Since the latter article is currently a dictionary definition, more or less, I propose it be made into a subsection to this article on adding a phrase to the English language. Palladmial (talk) 04:25, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. JKBrooks85 (talk) 05:11, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I disagree. One article is about a somewhat common English idiom -- to bell the cat -- and the other is about an historical fable. In another context, I have also heard the idiom used to mean "drawing conspicuous attention to a problem," which is, if anything, a misreading of the point of the fable. Doesn't that suggest that the idiom has taken on a life of its own, and should be handled separately? Jefficus Oct 8, 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jefficus (talk • contribs) 19:05, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm being bold in closing this old discussion as no consensus to merge, as I agree with Jefficus that there are significant differences between the two articles. I'll go ahead and remove the overlapping information from the articles. Airplaneman ✈ 18:48, 28 May 2010 (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.

Belling the cat TymiracleDavis (talk) 06:52, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion proposed

According to User:HelloAnnyong here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lion%27s_share, WP is not meant to provide dictionary pages - Wiktionary fulfils that function. A proposal to merge this article with the The Bell and the Cat has been rejected, mistakenly in my opinion. There is no new information here that is not found already in the article on the fable. In view of the WP policy not to act as a dictionary, I therefore propose deletion of Belling the Cat and will put up the tag in a few days unless a good case is made here for retaining it. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 18:29, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree. Delete and redirect to that article. I hate to see an article I started go up in smoke, but you're right. JKBrooks85 (talk) 23:53, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It does, however, include articles having titles that appear in dictionaries. I think the merge proposal probably wouldn't have attracted much more participation than the few comments it did. As a close it was fine; I would've likely gone the other way, which would've also been fine. As an aside, I thought this page's previous title "Bell the Cat" preferable to its current one. No reason to delete as far as I see; the small amount of information (or clearer prose) not already in the "The Bell and the Cat" article--yet should be, can be merged. The closer probably still has it watchlisted, so suggest just leaving it for a week or so for further input then taking it from there. –Whitehorse1 16:05, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thoughtful comments so far. I have already merged the material in this article with the fable article. Ideally what I would like is to use the present title "Belling the Cat" for the article on the fable and will do some cutting and pasting from that to this article, and then do a redirect. Effectively that will merge the fable article with this one, which will probably please JKBrooks85. I agree that "Bell the Cat" was the better title for the 'dictionary' article, but for the fable the use of the adverbial phrase is better and is the name it generally goes by now. That compares with other instances, such as The Lion's Share, of the idiom drawn from them now being applied to fables that formerly had other names.

I'll wait a few more days before taking any action and see if there are any other comments or suggestions. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 11:34, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a fine plan to me. I would suggest that we set up a redirect from "Bell the cat" to the resulting article and appropriate section, as that's a common usage. --Nuujinn (talk) 00:35, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Content has now been moved manually. Because of that, I can't do a redirect from the "The Bell and the Cat" page. If someone more technically minded knows how, please do it. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 15:22, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copy of exchange on Airplaneman's talk page: Thanks for managing the redirect of the old article to its new home. That was very quick! Shouldn't the original discussion on merger ALSO appear on the discussion page for Belling the cat? Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 15:42, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :). I think you're right about the discussion also appearing on the discussion page for Belling the cat, now that I think about it... just make sure to move the whole thing and note its original location. And thanks for catching this! Airplaneman ✈ 15:45, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In human society section

This section seems to be just bolted on to the article, and I'm unsure as to how it relates to the article. Can anyone explain the relationship? Does the book referenced discuss the phrase "bell the cat"? --Nuujinn (talk) 13:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any. Haven't read the book. –Whitehorse1 16:05, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neither have I, if no one can respond to the relevance of the source, I'll see if I can get a copy of the book. --Nuujinn (talk) 18:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The addition was obviously off-topic. The article is about the meaning of the phrase, not about its sociological aspects. I have therefore deleted it. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 11:15, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a Panchatantra Story

Maybe you guys have never heard of Panchatantra but you should. See this for example. 2600:1700:38D0:56D0:AC72:5BF2:64A4:87E7 (talk) 00:24, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this guy read a scholarly translation of the Panchatantra before you were born, and that story is not there. Nor are most others in the website you quote. You'll need a more trustworthy reference than that. Sweetpool50 (talk) 15:04, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]