Talk:Catfight

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Catfight article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Gender studies Unassessed

This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies

???

This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : see Unassessed Gender studies articles and Unknown-importance Gender studies articles
Cleanup : edit to see
Collaborate : see /Collaboration
Copyedit : edit to see
Deletion sorting : see /Sexuality and gender
Expand : edit to see
Infobox : see Gender studies articles needing infoboxes
Merge : edit to see
Notability : edit to see
NPOV : edit to see
Orphans : Brannon Masculinity Scale · Holy Virility · Media and gender · Michael Kaufman (author) · Women's education in Saudi Arabia
Photo : see Wikipedia requested photographs of gender studies
Split : History of feminism
Stubs : see Gender studies stubs
Translate : see /translation
Update : edit to see
Verify : Riot grrrl
Needs attention : see Gender studies articles needing attention

Psychology Unassessed

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology 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.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Sociology Unassessed

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Anthropology Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

History Unassessed

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)
Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.
Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

Is this really something that merits an encyclopedia entry? What information could possibly elevate it from substub status? Junkyardprince | Tark 00:29, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps an account of its role as a technical term in dramaturgy, if I am right in guessing that it may be so regarded. Michael Hardy 19:21, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Seinfeld reference

This section was recently added to the article. I do not think it is relevant to the article. It adds neither color nor clarity to the article and does not expand the reader's understanding. One comedian's hypothesis about an unproven "sexual attraction" to catfights is hardly authoritative. Pulling the section to here for discussion. Rossami (talk) 05:27, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by authoritative, it's not supposed to be. With better context, this quote will be returned to the article. The 156th episode of Seinfeld revolved around the theme or idea of a cat fight. Overall, there is plenty of room for expansion: (1) The differences between cat "fight" and cat "play" could be explained in greater detail, not to mention (2) a more in depth look at cat fights (in the non literal sense) between two human females. There is also room to look into (3) the interest of cat fighting within the adult film industry. Feel free to take a stab at any one of these if you have the time. —RaD Man (talk) 16:11, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

In American television

The subject of a cat fight was one the key elements of the TV sitcom Seinfeld episode number 156, The Summer of George:

Elaine: Ok, why? Why do guys do this? What is so appealing to men about a cat fight?
Kramer: Yeye cat fight!
Jerry: Because men think if women are grabbing and clawing at each other there's a chance they might somehow kiss.

(Source: Seinfeldscripts.com.)

Latifa twice

Perhaps combine the seperate mentionings of Latifa into one.

I'm planning on condensing the whole section into something that actually resembles writing instead of a list at some point. --Malthusian (talk) 23:08, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An American fascination?

I've read and heard about men supposedly being fascinated with catfights, but somehow neither me nor anybody I know locally seems to be able to back that claim up by example.

Other than catfights involving two women in movement, there doesn't seem anything particularily interesting about it to me. Yet, it's something men are supposed to be interested in according to many American tv shows I've seen. Also, there are commercial websites distributing catfight videos alongside hardcore pornography.

Is it uniquely American, is the American media exaggerating the prevalence of the phenomenon (as usual), or are the other male people I know and me just the exception to the rule? — Ashmodai ^{(talk · contribs)} 20:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could be an American forte because many American women are more assertive - hard to say. Catfight fever is definitely not a creation of the news media. The preoccupation with catfighting in the entertainment media is driven by the fact that it's appealing or interesting to men and women on different levels. Not being turned on by a good catfight is like not being turned on by a beautiful woman licking her lips.

This is not true. Britain has a huge catfighting industry and features catfights on many of their shows. Also I have seen alot of Catfight video and related products come out of Europe and Japan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by D4tress (talk • contribs) 12:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion vs Facts

How far can we go within this topic in terms of opinion vs facts? Stating whether a particular company is good or bad?, or if particular models used are pretty or not? Where are the lines drawn? —Preceding unsigned comment added by D4tress (talk • contribs) 11:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

www.fscclub.com/main/main.shtml link is not SPAM

THis site is a research site about women who fight including, catfights, wrestling and Martial Arts.

It is not commercial in that it SELLS NOTHING!

Please stop deleting the link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by D4tress (talk • contribs) 13:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commecial or otherwise. We aren't here to push your fetish clubs with personal essays and stories. This isn't the place for it. Montco (talk) 02:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a research site. If you feel that the subject in and of itself is a Fetish, then by your clasification it should not be listed on wikipedia at all along with many other topics. I understand why for profit is considered SPAM but this site is not selling anything.

I recommend the WP external link guidelines. THis link in my opinion fails on several levels including pushing any website links including blogs and forums and links to unverifiable research. If you do not agree, there are administrators including User:Hu12 who spend more time on wikispamming issues and can be contacted for a second opinion. Montco (talk) 16:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. I will follow up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by D4tress (talk • contribs) 11:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A few things;

SPAM
- External link spamming
External links policy
- Links normally to be avoided
What Wikipedia is not
- Wikipedia is not a repository for links
- Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising
Wikipedia:BLOCK#Disruption
- Persistent spamming
- Accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for the sole or primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization in apparent violation of Conflict of interest or anti-spam guidelines.--Hu12 (talk) 04:09, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All that is fine and good but please specify how this link is spam since it has useful relevant information and is not for profit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by D4tress (talk • contribs) 16:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]