From Citizendium, the Citizens' Compendium
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is basically copied from an external source and has not been approved.
Main Article
Definition [?]
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist. To update this checklist edit the metadata template.
 Definition Please add a brief definition or description.
To do.

  • A variant of English needs to be assigned.
Metadata here


Can we have more evidence that "Tubcat" is more than just a funny website, and is actually an Internet phenomenon? Like a link to the Washington Times article, or perhaps a quotation from it? Note, the evidence need not be included in the article itself, but here on this page.

If this is "legit," then we should try to get permission to use the picture, which is very cute. :-)

Also, no pages link to tubcat. Please find (or create!) a page to link to tubcat from--if indeed we want to keep it. I noticed that WP deleted it. But WP's decisions are not ours!

--Larry Sanger 10:50, 23 January 2007 (CST)

Hi Larry, this is where I found the news article. It discusses a Russian cat that was possibly to usurp tubcat in size.
As with many internet memes, no one knows who first sent the message, so getting permission might be hard. So far as I know, no one's ever tracked down the girl who owned the cat. We're accepting "permission" licenses? From what I've read, Wikipedia abandoned that due to the fact other mirror sites are not necessarily covered by permission.
Regarding pages linking here, user:Nancy Sculerati MD says she's writing an article on pet obesity. -- Melanie St Clair 11:56, 24 January 2007 (CST)


User:Francis Tyers put a {{delete}} template on this article. First of all, we have no "articles for deletion" process yet. How we go about deleting articles has yet to be decided. Second, whatever we do, we should not place such tags on the articles themselves. Metadata about articles should be placed here, on talk pages. --Larry Sanger 19:09, 23 January 2007 (CST)

Regarding deletion, I had found some Wikipedia podcast you were on. You had said so long as things could be referenced and maintained, they'd be welcome, regardless of notability. -- Melanie St Clair 11:58, 24 January 2007 (CST)
That's correct and (it seems) applicable in this case. But bear in mind that maintainability refers not just to a particular article but to whole classes of articles. The relevant question in this case, which we have not yet discussed, is whether we can have a complete and well-maintained set of articles about all "Internet memes." Actually though the notion of maintainability (of a set of articles) depends entirely on what the inclusive set is. Perhaps you might want to say that we can maintain all the articles about, well, fat cats. Anyway, clearly this all needs some more thought... --Larry Sanger 12:12, 24 January 2007 (CST)
So, if we can maintain one or ten, but not all 50, then none should exist? For example, if it was found we couldn't maintain an article on a contemporary Indonesian artist, all Indonesian artist articles would be invalid? -- Melanie St Clair 12:31, 24 January 2007 (CST)
Good question. If we can't responsibly main the vast bulk of the entries of a certain type, then we shouldn't start in. This explains (better than "notability") why we don't want articles on every named street in the world. We probably would not be able to maintain a full set of articles about Indonesian artists, since there must be so many of them and so many of them are completely unknown, but we could say we welcome articles on Indonesian artists whose work had been displayed at a Jakarta gallery, or all those who had reached some other level of distinction--in other words, all those of some definite, nonarbitrary category. --Larry Sanger 13:04, 24 January 2007 (CST)

I think we have to consider how much benefit we get from articles on internet memes (little) versus how much work they are to maintain (a lot). Thats why I added the non-existant deletion template. I also think that it is kind of wierd that we don't have any process for deletion yet. - Francis Tyers 09:49, 26 January 2007 (CST)


What workgroup would you assign to this? -Tom Kelly (Talk) 13:01, 18 March 2007 (CDT)