This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects 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.
Researcher Elizabeth von Muggenthaler believes that purring may be a healing mechanism. Using recordings of purring cats, she measured the frequency of their purrs and found a range of 25 to 150 Hertz. This frequency range is the same as the therapeutic frequency range used by doctors for a number of purposes including the following:
She reasons that purring may have evolved to serve these functions in cats. After all, for a sit-and-wait predator, like the cat, having a mechanism of self healing would be a significant evolutionary advantage. In the wild, cats spend most of their time resting and sleeping to conserve their energy for the hunt. Purring during these periods of rest may keep them in peak condition by helping to prevent muscle atrophy, keeping their bones strong and speeding recovery from minor injuries.
I removed an image of a cat with abnormally coloured eyes. I left an edit summary justifying this deletion, as per WP:BRD, but other editors disagree with this reason and are reverting my edit without bringing to this Talk page. Why should this article use valuable image space to show just one of hundreds or thousands of abnormalities in cats. There is an entire article Cat health which already includes an image of heterochromia! The cat article should present the "normal situation" to correctly inform the reader. At the moment, the caption does not even indicate this is an abnormality or give the correct technical name for the disease!__DrChrissy (talk) 21:33, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
No opinion on the photo, but you misunderstand the BRP cycle. You removed the photo (bold), another removed it (revert), then it's brought to the talk page (discuss). The photo should stay until there is a consensus. Яehevkor✉ 21:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Let's not get bogged down in the details of the WP:BRP process. The fact is that I have brought the deletion/inclusion of this image to the Talk page. Please discuss whether this image of an abnormal animal should be included in this article. That is the issue.__DrChrissy (talk) 02:22, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
That is the issue, but that issue is overshadowed by edit warring. Agree with Rehevkor above that removal of the photo was the B of BRD and therefore the burden was on DrChrissy to take the discussion here and not to repeat the removal. It looks like you've officially crossed WP:3RR which means an automatic block if reported. That could probably be avoided by self-reverting the last one, though. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 03:53, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Good, then you can stop deleting the image. I see no problem with it myself - the article summarises cats, "abnormal" or otherwise. Perhaps a sentence should be added mentioning the condition in the health section - the image can be moved there. Яehevkor✉ 10:56, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
I still see no reason why this one condition should receive such a focus of attention. Please justify why this photo should be included. e.g. is this a particularly prevalent condition in this breed of cat? At the moment, it appears the only justification for this image is its "cuteness".__DrChrissy (talk) 13:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Has anyone actually said "cuteness" is a reason? Where is that from? LxRv (a.ka. Rehevkor) 19:37, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Heterochromia is an unusual but completely natural genetic trait; and common enough in cats to be worth noting in the article. Mediatech492 (talk) 20:05, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Ok, well let's get some facts on the disorder and present it in the text with appropriate sources. New information should not be introduced in caption images. And the Health section is far more appropriate for this image than presenting this condition as if it is "normal". To be balanced and comprehensive, this section should include reasonable discussion of other disorders with appropriate in-line citations.__DrChrissy (talk) 01:06, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
It's not a "disorder" it is a genetic trait. The cat suffers no disadvantage from being Heterochromatic. The section it belongs in is the Anatomy section, alongside other noted cat traits such as Polydactylism. Mediatech492 (talk) 17:24, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
On the Cat health article, heterochromia is listed as a "genetic disease"...but we could play semantics all day. For those interested in wider discussion of this image issue, I have raised it here .__DrChrissy (talk) 18:15, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
In the section "Impact on prey species" the page currently reads: "To date, few scientific data are available to assess the impact of cat predation on prey populations." A more (grammatically?) correct version of this would be "To date, little scientific data is available to assess the impact of cat predation on prey populations." 22.214.171.124 (talk) 19:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, but "few data" could be correct. Few data means there are few specific instances of data (that could each have a lot of information, but there still aren't enough instances to make any conclusion), while little data means each instance of data has little information (even though there could be a lot of instances). Now, if the sources cited favor little data over few data, that's another issue (though I do not have proper access to the sources and so cannot make that call). Ian.thomson (talk) 20:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Change "Another possible explanations is" (sentence 3, paragraph 2 of Hunting and Feeding section) to "Another possible explanation is" Must be changed for s/v agreement. Trishedits (talk) 05:27, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Done thanks for pointing that out - Arjayay (talk) 07:10, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I noticed that in the multilingual discussion of the various words for what we in modern English call a "cat," examples are given in the vernacular of many Western societies, all of which that use the Romantic alphabet. There are no examples given for, say, Chinese, which in Pinyin is "mao," or to transliterate from Korean Hangul, "goyang-i." I don't think the Asian or Eastern European words that need to be transliterated into the Roman alphabet should be omitted in the Western versions of Wikipedia. It's just my opinion that a discussion of what cats are called should include these other, non-Western societies. Kelelain (talk) 00:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC)