Talk:LaPerm

Revision[edit]

26/11/06 The version of the LaPerm breed profile updated today has been put together in consultation with an international LaPerm working groups with representatives from all off the major registries which recognise the LaPerm, including CFA, TICA, SACC and GCCF. If people wish to request additions to the profile they are requested to go through their breed chairs or reps from their relevant registries. Deletions have been made from the previous version where there were facutal inacuracies, content that was in copyright without permision to be published and content with an informal tone that was not appropriate for an encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quincunxcats (talk • contribs)

"Native American culture"[edit]

The LaPerm breed is strongly allied with Native American culture as the area where the Koehl’s farm is situated is in a sacred territory of the Wishram people, a Chinook speaking tribe who traditionally made a living netting, drying and trading salmon from the Columbia River. The area still contains rock carvings of the vigilant goddess Tsagaglalal. It is because of this that many LaPerm breeders give Native American names to their kittens and decorate their pens with this theme in mind when showing.

I think the first sentence needs a rewrite--I doubt that actual Native Americans are involved in or "allied with" this cat breed. Perhaps it means "inspired by"? I'm not sure what Tsagaglalal has to do with any of this. I won't get into the cultural appropriation that is evidenced by the rest of this paragraph, but if some cites are provided for the Native American connection, I would be grateful. Katr67 14:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revision[edit]

12 June 2007 The message below still stands. Someone has been making unhelpful changes and should request changes through the working group, or by using this page if they are not a LaPerm owner.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Quincunxcats (talk • contribs)

moved from top, new comments go on the bottom. author is referring to "revision" message above.pschemp | talk 01:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read about Ownerhip of articles. Thanks. Katr67 (talk) 19:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TICA breed specifications link[edit]

The link to the TICA breed specifications is invalid. It generate a 404 page not found error. The new correct link is: http://www.ticaeo.com/Content/Publications/Pages/LP.pdf Geotex 01:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revisions to standards[edit]

If one is going to post "updated breed standards", why not post CFA and TICA standards instead of referencing a GCCF standard which is not in conformation with published standards of the above mentioned international associations Geotex 00:10, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this article incomplete and reads as if the LaPerm is only being promoted in the UK?[edit]

If the person who keep re-editing this would be OPEN minded and list everyone involved and not who he personally picks and chooses, the article might seem fair, instead of so one-sided.

He refuses to list ALL LaPerm clubs and assocaitions. He refuses to allow the complete factaul LaPerm pedigree database that accessable to EVERYONE, not simply the people who have to write to the UK club and ask for information. The editor of this artilce allows only photos of cats from the UK, bypassing cats closer to the orginal LaPerms. The person editing this site makes it read like an advertizment and not a factual accounting of the development of the breed. Too many of the links go to the UK LaPerm CLub, and not ALL LaPerm clubs and assocations.

Whether this persaon likes certian people or not should not be reflected in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LaPerm8 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can tell, the database you added is only for two catteries. The original link is not actually a database but a description of the database. So both links are pretty much useless. As for the clubs and associations in the External Links section they all probably fail the WP:EL guidelines and should be removed. If any useful info (such as a detailed breed history) is hosted on one of those sites, we should link directly to the useful article instead of the main page. Non of your edits added photos, on the contrary, you edited out multiple images and the GCCF breed standard without stating a reason. So I don't really understand your "original LaPerm" comment. The tone is problematic, but you have to either fix it yourself or just wait patiently for someone else to do it. --220.255.x.x (talk) 03:29, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to concur with 220.255.x.x. WP articles, especially those about pop culture topics like pets and movies, are always being festooned with nearly useless or even overtly promotional links. a "database" of two catteries is not a database, it's just advertising. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ɖ^⊝כ^⊙þ Contrib. 04:02, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Born curled, born straight, born bald[edit]

What i miss in the article are some words about the different coat conditions at birth. There are breeders (maybe even clubs) who include the coat condition into the name. Is there anything similar in US? --Harald wehner (talk) 07:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a children's storybook[edit]

The essentially unverifiable "heartwarming kitty story" material in here, obviously supplied either directly or indirectly by the breeder herself, is not encyclopedic. No one reading this article needs to know that the original cat with this mutation was injured in a pickup truck, that people found her disposition sweet when they made her a house cat, that dogs threatened her litter, blah blah blah. Wikipedia is not a bedtime story. A lot of cat and dog breed articles have similar problems, because people keep using woefully unreliable "repeat whatever the breeder said as if it's not only gospel but important" cat fancy and dog fancy magazine articles as sources. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ɖ^⊝כ^⊙þ Contrib. 04:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC) If a revision of this section is made I think it needs to retain the information that an unusually affectionate temperament was a trait noticed in the founding cat which was selected for and retained by breeders. Quincunxcats (talk) 16:21, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism?[edit]

So, I was just editing this article when I realized some where in the middle that much of the text is copied verbatim from http://books.google.com/books?id=EtVvAwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=been%20selected%20for%2C%20so&f=false Since I know myself, and I know I will most likely not end up posting this unless I do it right now before I edit my post too much beforehand, I'm going to go ahead and just leave it at that for now. EDIT: Well, either that or someone is pulling stuff off of Wikipedia and turning that into a book. This might have to be brought to some more privileged Wikipedians. I don't know. I don't really have time to think about this any more. Repku (talk) 05:01, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:LaPerm/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I posted a note about differences between CFA, TICA and GCCF standards. Someone promptly removed it. If this listing about LaPerms is to be factual, as claimed by some of the authors, the differences in breed standards should be posted to alert CFA and TICA participants that the LaPerms being shown in GCCF do not meet standards and cannot be registered and/or shown with CFA and TICA international associations.Geotex 00:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 00:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 21:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on LaPerm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:11, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]