397:
in this new category? Should all people who are attracted to animals be added to. Lots of people are attracted to animals (in a non-sexual manner of course). Lots of people (include stars with bio articles), can't walk past certain types of animals, without coming up to them, and petting them, and admiring how "handsome" or "cute" they are. Whether we expand the definition of zoophilia or we invent some new broader category like "Human-animal attraction", you've got essentially the same problem: if you add
Tendler to it, you would have to add countless others to it. If you add Tendler to such a category, and you don't add every other animal lover (half the population), you're engaged in defamation, because your trying to imply something dirty. Please don't think weasel wording gets you off the hook on this. Either you imply its something perverted or you don't. There is no middle ground on this. Its like lumping together somebody who loves, hugs, and kisses their kids in a "child love" category along with pedophiles. It doesn't fly. --
587:, but I like to follow it. Do not suggest I "slander" readers. That's silly. You're trying to introduce the word "sexual" to somewhere it doesn't exist. If it was up to me everybody would have avoid this whole time waster a long time ago. You seem to forget that Tendler is an actual living person, who has a right not to be defamed. In other cases, you've personally done a great job finding realiable sources, where they seemed hard to find. Now, you realize there are none (that are reliable and prove the point), but won't admit it. Lets face it no respected academic on Earth would use this case to study "human animal relations". We all knew that from the start. --
258:
181:
156:
21:
497:
they say in the article (naturally showing the full spectrum of such published opinion in an NPOV manner). Then, we can categorize it based on their expert opinion. We shouldn't pretend to be experts ourselves though. Currently, we have no published opinions from "human animal relationship" experts in the article. --
706:
Based on some of the quotes, those people all qualify. If they got decent press coverage then they deserve articles here too. However, I think
Tendler and Cindy are special and maybe unique. Anyone can marry their pet, but Tendler has displayed enormous devotion and commitment to express her love
396:
has at least one human that loves it very much. In fact, the trainer of the dolphin probably has a substantially greater emotional and physical (non-sexual of course) relationship with this dolphin that does
Tendler. Are you suggesting that all animals that are loved and cared for by people with go
694:
of typical pet lovers doing essentially the same thing. Note, these people actually live with their "spouses". The only thing special about
Tendler/Cindy is the story got insane press coverage, but really nothing special about their relationship existed. Will you be making bio articles on each of
562:
What can I say? Changing the definition to suit your argument is rather pathetic. Your obstinacy is also rather breathtaking. I'm not going to waste anymore of my time discussing your fixation with the sexuality of this fish. However, you do a great injustice to our readers when you slander the very
345:
Use of this category is implying the woman had a sexual interest in the dolphin. There is *no* evidence of this whatsover. In fact, she indicated the opposite. She doesn't live with or sleep with the dolphin. There's no indication they are left alone together. There is nothing remotely sexual.
448:
Also, just a reminder. This article is about the dolphine *only*. Not about the person (remember we deleted that). So, unless you can verify the *dolphin* has some sort of pecular attraction to people, you can't put the dolphin in such a category. This debate would be an interesting one for the
416:
So, why does this belong in this category more then other much more famous animals that are loved by regular people, or regular animals loved by famous people. Just think of all celeb interviews where somebody told the reporter how much they loved their animals. There's entire TV programs devoted
678:
It began with the 41-year-old
Tendler walking down the dock in a white silk dress towards the water where 35-year-old Cindy was waiting. Tendler then kissed the dolphin, gave him a piece of mackerel, and whispered the words "I love you" in his blowhole, to the cheers of the spectators. Afterwards,
663:
By that definition all pet owners can put in the category. In fact, since pet owners actually live with their pets (unlike
Tendler who merely *visits* the dolphin), the pet owners are *more* suited to your proposed new category name. Surely if somebody lives with an animal almost every day, year
496:
Perhaps the best way of determining the appropriate categorization, is to look towards well respected researchers in the field (presumabley academics). Please cite the appropriate sources from published authors, who have commented on this specific matter in reputable publications. Indicate what
282:
We don't really know if Sharon is a millionaire. Some reported that, but its not clear if she just made the claim. Nothing can be found on this woman pre-dolphin, we should be very careful about talking about Sharon outside the
Dolphin story, as we don't know anything about her *realiably*. I
828:
Theres thousands of fictional relationships. I kind of had in mind, real ones, which were notable or recognized as such. There's a thousand Lassi's, but compare that to the deep enduring bond of Jane
Goodall for gorillas, its not even close. I was thinking "bonds which exemplify human-animal
541:
Cite an *expert* who published an opinion on this incident, that uses the term "Zoosexuality". Notice the embedded word "sexual". There's *nothing* sexual. Its libel to say there is (or imply it). If people are going to misue the category and start adding individual animals and people to
550:, as it requires *external* sources, not internal ones. Surely, if this incident is notable, you'll have no problems finding such an expert source. People have been arguing that this incident is of great academic research interest to "those in the field". If so, prove it. --
546:, it will become, sadly, necessary to delete the category. You can't call somebody a derogatory term, without backing. You may cite a notable expert, who's used that term, but we're not supposed to be doing original research. Citing our own article as a source, ignores
453:
article (if it existed). But, is quite irrelevant for this article. Frankly, I think we all know this dolphine has no more "attraction" (of any type) to people than any other dolphine. Even if the
Tendler fit in a different category, the dolphine doesn't.
312:
This implies she was 41 years old at the time she *first* saw the
Dolphin. That's false. The article is implying Sharon is about 56 years old, as it suggests the 15 years of visits came after a 41-year old visited the dolphin.
654:. Definition #1: "Affection or affinity for animals". The category is appropriate, though it might be worth proposing that the "Zoosexuality" category be renamed to "Zoophilia", since that seems to be the more general term.
406:
Other people who like animals don't make the headlines for the way they express it, that's why this story is notable within its field. It's not defamation because she wouldn't deny being emotionally attracted to the animal.
306:
The creature was seen by a 41-year-old British woman, Sharon Tendler, during a show. Tendler then visited Cindy for 15 years before finally having the ceremony December 28, 2005 after gaining permission from the dolphin's
283:
don't trust publications that claim she is a millionair rock promoter, when such a person would likely have a web site, and would seek attention before the Dolphin thing (and be known before the dolphin). --
230:
89:
846:
I hear what you're trying to say, but I think we should probably come up with a clear guideline for it to put on the category (to avoid confusion in the future). I recommend we continue this discussion at
829:
relationships. Thus, michael jackson is very attached to bubbles, but its not a notable relationship in the same way, its not "the notable thing" about MJ, its not "why he's famous". Elsa might be though.
520:. Also, for the umpteenth time the marriage is not real in law *or* in practise. She did the ceromony, and went back to England. They don't live together (obviously), or have any special relations. --
34:
911:
It is said, with a source, that the dolphin was about 35 yo on 2005. So, he was born circa 1970. But on the first line it is said, with no source, c. 1975. Any source? Or it should have to be arranged?
605:. And while the extent of her intimate relationship with Cindy is certainly none of our business, it is clearly safe to say that Tendler herself recognizes and expresses feelings that fully qualify as "
108:
301:, Sharon is (at the time of the event/story/fake-wedding) 41 years old. She met the dolphin 15 years ago. Therefore she was about 26 years old. But the following is what our article says now:
625:") , should not override the clear consensus here to categorize this article in a way that can attract further input from educated readers and other scholars of man-Delphinidae bonding. --
360:
Libel was not intended. The category was the most appropriate one that I could find for articles about romantic interest in animals. The category's description clearly says,
473:
Readers don't look for dolphins in categories designed for people. The bio article on Tendler is deleted, and this article should not be categorized like it was a person. --
417:
to interviewing celebrities and the pets they love. This ain't the first animal human love story. It just seems special, because the 15 minutes haven't elapsed yet. --
223:
70:
271:
237:
635:
Wow! Its those who are obsessed with the sexuality of the mammal (its not a fish), who are the ones that made and kept this absurd page, which disgraces Knowledge.
127:
252:
Can this page be revised to include factual information only? The text as it stands reads like a fantastic Mills-and-Boon cross-species daytime TV drama. --
464:
Readers are intestested in the story more than the woman or the dolphin, those readers should be able to find the article by looking in related categories.
876:
241:
664:
round, for the pets whole life, cares for them, nurses them when their sick, feeds them regularly, and so on, that's a more substantial sign of "
930:
30:
873:
268:
668:" then visiting an animal a few times a year. I think a ballpark figure would be about half the the Western population meets the test. --
426:
If there was a program about _how much_ people love their pets, not just "celebrities and the pets they love", it would fit nicely into
597:
I disagree. This page does great credit to wikipedia. Furthermore, I have not forgotten that Tendler is a living person. Rather than "
33:. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the
187:
161:
848:
507:
I think Elonka got this right. If we find a better category it can be changed, but the dolphin married a woman so it fits. --
346:
If a person as a child had play wedding with a relative, we don't classify their bio article under "incest". Use of the term
328:
Yes, that's clear. But the WP article (when it had the age) wasn't. Note, you just cited the same article I already did. --
679:
some mackerels (instead of wedding rice) were tossed into the water, and the married couple was allowed to swim away together
298:
759:
427:
376:
613:
article. When Tendler metaphorically walked down the aisle with Cindy, she at once became the poster child for the "
866:
20:
393:
240:
for a record of the discussion. This deletion decision was nominated for Deletion Review on 24 May 2008. See
812:
808:
543:
380:
339:
913:
762:, which I can see many notable human-animal bonds being categorized under. Let's go and find some.....
733:
257:
776:
Edit: Zoosexuality then becomes one kind of relationship, a subcategory. And the site quoted above,
583:), who are the ones that made and kept this absurd page, which disgraces Knowledge. I didn't invent
192:
166:
450:
253:
531:
How about our article- 15 years of emotional attachment + a kiss + a wedding (legal or not). --
516:
Cite a reliable source that agrees with you, and I'll accept it. Otherwise, its a violation of
736:. I find it amazing anybody thought the dolphin stunt was something truly new and unique. --
681:. ---Most pet owners don't declare their love in a public ceremony in front of spectators. --
887:
800:
638:
362:
Articles related to zoophilia or zoosexuality, the emotional or sexual attraction to animals
617:". The fact that you are unwilling to acknowledge Tendler's love (overtly viewing it as "
364:. If that's not the appropriate category, is there another that you would recommend?
924:
837:
799:
I like the new category. Should we add all famous human-animal contacts there, from
789:
767:
737:
696:
669:
588:
551:
521:
498:
474:
455:
418:
398:
351:
329:
314:
284:
482:
Readers look for information in related categories, we should help them to find it.
610:
547:
347:
695:
these people, and their "partners", and putting them in the category as well? --
852:
816:
781:
655:
584:
517:
365:
180:
155:
483:
465:
431:
408:
384:
646:
For a reference of how human-animal marriages qualify under the category of "
897:
708:
682:
647:
626:
564:
532:
508:
691:
833:
785:
763:
651:
916:
900:
890:
855:
841:
819:
793:
771:
740:
711:
699:
685:
672:
658:
641:
629:
591:
567:
554:
535:
524:
511:
501:
486:
477:
468:
458:
434:
421:
411:
401:
387:
368:
354:
332:
317:
287:
261:
615:
affective bond to animals beyond the usual, whether emotional or sexual
804:
576:
229:
This page was nominated again for deletion on 19 January 2006. See
563:
real emotional attachment between Cindy and her special friend. --
755:
580:
236:
This page was nominated again for deletion on 17 May 2008. See
707:
for Cindy. Their story is clearly an inspiration for many. --
807:? Or might it make more sense to link it to categories like
832:
Is anything along those lines workable? What do you reckon?
375:
Maybe we should make one with a less specific name, such as
780:, is probably a decent example of non-sexual zoophilia, or
777:
575:
Wow! Its those who are obsessed with the sexuality of the
896:
Say it ain't so! A loss for dolphin lovers everywhere. --
222:
This page was nominated for deletion on 8 Jan 2006. See
886:
I can't beliee this Dolphin has died, it's a tragedy...
120:
101:
82:
63:
732:Some more potential articles for the category:
601:" her, I celebrate her love and union with this
190:, a project which is currently considered to be
8:
150:
42:
15:
758:says, a new category? I've just created
379:, and we could put both this article and
849:Category_talk:Human-animal_relationships
152:
734:"Cow marries bull, man marries dog..."
637:Please refrain from personal attacks.
186:This redirect is within the scope of
7:
760:Category:Human-animal relationships
609:" in the sense of our category and
14:
666:Affection or affinity for animals
140:Former featured article candidate
428:Category:Human-animal attraction
377:Category:Human-animal attraction
256:
233:for a record of the discussion.
226:for a record of the discussion.
179:
154:
19:
392:I suspect that every member of
202:Knowledge:WikiProject Cetaceans
874:Can't sleep, clown will eat me
269:Can't sleep, clown will eat me
205:Template:WikiProject Cetaceans
1:
322:She was 41 when she married.
262:22:54, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
931:Old requests for peer review
877:06:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
741:00:06, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
712:00:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
700:23:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
686:23:11, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
673:23:07, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
659:22:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
642:21:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
630:21:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
592:21:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
568:18:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
555:18:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
536:18:31, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
525:18:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
512:17:52, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
502:15:13, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
487:14:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
478:14:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
469:14:23, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
459:14:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
435:14:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
422:14:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
412:14:23, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
402:14:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
388:13:08, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
369:06:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
355:06:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
333:00:53, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
318:23:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
288:22:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
272:11:38, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
267:o_O I can't believe this.
244:for a record of the review.
917:07:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
947:
867:Knowledge:Unusual articles
856:19:52, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
842:23:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
820:15:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
794:10:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
772:08:56, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
109:Featured article candidate
31:featured article candidate
901:19:56, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
891:19:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
394:Category:Famous cetaceans
174:
137:
45:
41:
652:Answers.com "Zoophilia"
350:is clearly libelous. --
544:Category:Zoosexuality
381:Category:Zoosexuality
340:Category:Zoosexuality
188:WikiProject Cetaceans
90:Articles for deletion
71:Articles for deletion
813:Category:Famous cats
809:Category:Famous dogs
607:non-sexual zoophilia
208:Cetaceans articles
102:September 16, 2006
46:Article milestones
690:Here is are some
220:
219:
216:
215:
149:
148:
145:
144:
938:
801:Elsa the lioness
778:marryyourpet.com
603:fish with a womb
324:
323:
260:
210:
209:
206:
203:
200:
183:
176:
175:
170:
158:
151:
138:Current status:
123:
121:October 13, 2006
104:
85:
83:January 19, 2006
66:
43:
23:
16:
946:
945:
941:
940:
939:
937:
936:
935:
921:
920:
909:
884:
870:
343:
295:
280:
250:
207:
204:
201:
198:
197:
164:
119:
100:
81:
64:January 8, 2006
62:
27:Cindy (dolphin)
12:
11:
5:
944:
942:
934:
933:
923:
922:
908:
905:
904:
903:
883:
880:
869:
864:
863:
862:
861:
860:
859:
858:
830:
823:
822:
752:
751:
750:
749:
748:
747:
746:
745:
744:
743:
721:
720:
719:
718:
717:
716:
715:
714:
704:
703:
702:
632:
573:
572:
571:
570:
539:
538:
529:
528:
527:
494:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
451:Sharon Tendler
446:
445:
444:
443:
442:
441:
440:
439:
438:
437:
372:
371:
342:
337:
336:
335:
310:
309:
294:
291:
279:
276:
275:
274:
254:(aeropagitica)
249:
246:
218:
217:
214:
213:
211:
184:
172:
171:
159:
147:
146:
143:
142:
135:
134:
131:
124:
116:
115:
112:
105:
97:
96:
93:
86:
78:
77:
74:
67:
59:
58:
55:
52:
48:
47:
39:
38:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
943:
932:
929:
928:
926:
919:
918:
915:
906:
902:
899:
895:
894:
893:
892:
889:
881:
879:
878:
875:
868:
865:
857:
854:
850:
845:
844:
843:
839:
835:
831:
827:
826:
825:
824:
821:
818:
814:
810:
806:
802:
798:
797:
796:
795:
791:
787:
783:
779:
774:
773:
769:
765:
761:
757:
742:
739:
735:
731:
730:
729:
728:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
713:
710:
705:
701:
698:
693:
689:
688:
687:
684:
680:
676:
675:
674:
671:
667:
662:
661:
660:
657:
653:
649:
645:
644:
643:
640:
636:
633:
631:
628:
624:
620:
616:
612:
608:
604:
600:
596:
595:
594:
593:
590:
586:
582:
578:
569:
566:
561:
560:
559:
558:
557:
556:
553:
549:
545:
537:
534:
530:
526:
523:
519:
515:
514:
513:
510:
506:
505:
504:
503:
500:
488:
485:
481:
480:
479:
476:
472:
471:
470:
467:
463:
462:
461:
460:
457:
452:
436:
433:
429:
425:
424:
423:
420:
415:
414:
413:
410:
405:
404:
403:
400:
395:
391:
390:
389:
386:
382:
378:
374:
373:
370:
367:
363:
359:
358:
357:
356:
353:
349:
341:
338:
334:
331:
327:
326:
325:
320:
319:
316:
308:
304:
303:
302:
300:
297:According to
292:
290:
289:
286:
277:
273:
270:
266:
265:
264:
263:
259:
255:
247:
245:
243:
239:
234:
232:
227:
225:
212:
195:
194:
189:
185:
182:
178:
177:
173:
168:
163:
160:
157:
153:
141:
136:
132:
130:
129:
125:
122:
118:
117:
113:
111:
110:
106:
103:
99:
98:
94:
92:
91:
87:
84:
80:
79:
75:
73:
72:
68:
65:
61:
60:
56:
53:
50:
49:
44:
40:
36:
32:
28:
25:
22:
18:
17:
914:81.38.179.81
910:
885:
871:
784:, nice one!
775:
753:
677:
665:
634:
622:
618:
614:
611:Zoosexuality
606:
602:
598:
574:
540:
495:
447:
361:
348:zoosexuality
344:
321:
311:
305:
296:
281:
251:
248:Old comments
235:
228:
221:
191:
139:
126:
114:Not promoted
107:
88:
76:No consensus
69:
29:is a former
26:
888:Englishrose
815:, etc.? --
782:Animal love
639:Englishrose
579:(its not a
383:inside it.
278:Millionaire
128:Peer review
650:", check
648:zoophilia
621:" and a "
199:Cetaceans
162:Cetaceans
925:Category
872:Added.
623:disgrace
307:trainer.
193:inactive
167:inactive
133:Reviewed
692:exampes
299:The Age
293:Numbers
54:Process
35:archive
853:Elonka
817:Elonka
805:Lassie
656:Elonka
619:absurd
599:defame
577:mammal
366:Elonka
57:Result
882:Death
756:kappa
548:WP:RS
484:Kappa
466:Kappa
432:Kappa
409:Kappa
385:Kappa
898:JJay
851:? --
838:Talk
790:Talk
768:Talk
709:JJay
683:JJay
627:JJay
585:WP:V
581:fish
565:JJay
533:JJay
518:WP:V
509:JJay
242:here
238:here
231:here
224:here
95:Kept
51:Date
907:age
834:FT2
803:to
786:FT2
764:FT2
754:As
738:Rob
697:Rob
670:Rob
589:Rob
552:Rob
522:Rob
499:Rob
475:Rob
456:Rob
430:.
419:Rob
399:Rob
352:Rob
330:Rob
315:Rob
285:Rob
927::
912:--
840:)
811:,
792:)
770:)
454:--
313:--
836:(
788:(
766:(
196:.
169:)
165:(
37:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
