Talk:big cat

big cat
Simply a large feline. --EncycloPetey 16:06, 11 February 2012 (UTC)


 * But almost exclusively refers to lions, tigers, etc. rather than domestic cats. Compare big dog, which would (nearly?) always refer to a large domestic dog and not, say, a wolf or something related. Equinox ◑ 16:10, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've changed "animal" to "wild animal" in the definition. Keep SemperBlotto 16:11, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Is it your contention that a tame lion is not a "big cat"? --EncycloPetey 06:02, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, a big cat is not just any cat that is big, it refers to a particular grouping of feline species. —CodeCat 16:45, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * That's not in the definition I've nominated. The nominated definition is: "Any large feline wild animal".  If there is a sense worth keeping, then add it, but please do not vote to "keep" a definition based on something that isn't present in the entry. --EncycloPetey 22:22, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, but I think it needs a better definition. Is anyone here familiar with the subject? Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 16:57, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, dunno what else to say. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete big: + cat:. That is, the lynx and similar cats larger than domestic cats are not included because they are not "big" members of the class of cats. DCDuring TALK 19:05, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Lynxes are sometimes considered big cats. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 19:44, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * All the more indication that big: is operating in its normal role and that the combined phrase is SoP. DCDuring TALK 19:48, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The comic character Garfield's a big cat, but not a big cat. ~ Robin 01:15, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * So, your argument is that the definition is wrong somehow and should thus be kept? I don't follow your reasoning.  Why should we keep an incorrect definition? --EncycloPetey 05:59, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, unless you have an SOP explanation for its use in such phrases as "the larger of the big cats". —Ruakh TALK 01:18, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The definition is: "Any large feline wild animal", and that's SoP to me. If you can explain why "any large feline" is not SoP, please do so.  OR do you think that the phrase "largest of the big companies" means we need an entry for big company? --EncycloPetey 04:04, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Re: first two sentences: I'm not commenting on the definition itself, but on the sense that the definition is attempting to capture. Re: last sentence: I certainly don't have a better explanation for "the third largest of the big companies". I find that cite bizarre. Perhaps it makes more sense in context, but Snippet View unfortunately doesn't afford us that context. —Ruakh TALK 21:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. I tried to improve the definition. I think that an imperfect definition is not a valid reason for deleting a page (or we would have to delete most pages). Lmaltier 21:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry? You voted to "keep" the nominated definition, but then changed that definition to say something entirely different. Which is it? Did you want to keep the "large feline" definition or not?  If you do want to put in another definition, you'll probably need to leave in the original, as most people have been voting to "keep" it. --EncycloPetey 21:50, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * We certainly can't improve the definition if we delete it. Keep with the best definition possible. It's quite common for definitions to be modified, you know. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:54, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It would be nice if we were voting on just a definition, but the question before us is whether to delete the whole entry. The only reason to delete the whole entry would be if it were impossible to make it fit the CFI. Demonstrating that it's redeemable is IMO a legitimate way to respond to an RfD Chuck Entz 22:05, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, present definition is worse than the previous one "member of a species belonging to a group of ... species" Ugh! SemperBlotto 22:07, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Why delete it if we can fix it? Chuck Entz 22:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * We need to look at great ape to see what would be a CFI version of big cat Chuck Entz 22:17, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I have reverted the changes to the definition. The RFDed definition:
 * Any large feline animal, such as the lion, tiger etc.
 * Reverted definitions:
 * Any large feline wild animal, such as the lion, tiger etc. (SemperBlotto)
 * Member of a species belonging to a group of large wild feline species, such as the lions, tigers, etc. (LMaltier)
 * I think the strange thing about "big cat" is that "big" selects on the species level, which Lmaltier was trying to capture in his def. Thus, in "big cat", "big" does not ask about the individual animal whether it is big but rather about its species whether it is big among the species of cats. --Dan Polansky 22:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * What also comes to mind is that "big cat" may often or always be used to refer to species rather than individuals, as in "The jaguar is a big cat", where the referent of "the jaguar" is a species. By the way, there is Big cat. --Dan Polansky 22:24, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Kept. DAVilla 21:26, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * , agree with analysis provided by admin, above. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 22:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)