Talk:Socks (cat)

Socks and Barney

I removed the reference to the webcomic Socks and Barney since its only 3 panels old, and not established. Seems to me like advertising more than anything. JoDB 21:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Notability?

I believe Socks may not be notable on its own. Articles about kids of Ronald Reagan and JFK were deleted as the kids died young and more importantly, as they were not notable on their own. Also, as it is a short article with less than 1000 words, I doubt if this can be considered DYK material. --Gurubrahma 05:39, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Cats always get top billing over kids! --malber 14:26, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Absolutely right. But apart from that, a glance at the list of presidential pets indicates that US presidents overwhelmingly prefer dogs. Many of the cats on the list apparently belonged to presidents' wives. Which is unsurprising - you'd sort of expect someone who spent their time rising through the ranks of the state to be more into dogs (pack animals) than cats (individualist). That makes Socks fairly unique; plus those pictures are just great :-). --Last Malthusian 12:12, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

First off, what the other's have said. Socks got plenty of media coverage while in the White House, kids who die young and DON'T have media coverage just need a stub on their parents' page(s). Also, plenty of stubs get DYK'ed. Staxringold 12:56, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Just to add for the rationale for notability: Presidential pets are noteworthy due to the fact that the pet is specifically chosen by the president. A president's choice of pet might reveal something internal about the person, though this is left up to individual interpretation. Children of presidents, on the otherhand, are born not chosen. And they have a voice for themselves. They'd have to do something remarkable, like say underage drinking to be noteworthy. --malber 15:29, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Polydactyl

Does anyone know if Socks is a polydactyl? Those paws look big! --malber 14:23, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Video game

I removed this, inserted by an anonymous editor:

"Socks the cat also got his own videogame, Socks the Cat Rocks the Hill. it was unrealeased."

because it was unverified, and I don't understand how he could have been said to have got his own game if it was unreleased. --Last Malthusian 15:58, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

I remember hearing about this in video game mags at the time. I didn't realize that it was ultimately not released, but it happens with videogames (such as Tattoo Assassins and Dino Rex). There is a page on the game at [1].--216.165.33.63 00:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Wow, and I thought it was referring to some kind of Flash game. I'm putting that back in. --Malthusian (talk) 00:30, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Done, and much kudos to 216.165 for finding that article. I removed one of the photos to make way for the game's cover art, which I didn't really want to do but the article doesn't seem big enough for three photos on the right. I tried to put the box art on the left but it made the text go behind the picture, and even if it hadn't the article would have been a bit cramped. If anyone can manage to get all three photos on the page without making the pictures dangle past the text, that would be great. (Best case scenario would be if we could expand the article another paragraph, of course.)

I think if worst comes to worst we should have the box art instead of a second photo, because if someone reads that Socks was going to have a computer game, their natural reaction would be "er... what?" Of course we have the external links to prove it, but much better to have a picture right next to the paragraph, in the article. --Malthusian (talk) 00:56, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, article's been expanded, based mainly on the Purr 'n' Fur article, and is now long enough to have the three pictures. Using that website as a source may skirt standards of verifiability, but I'm going by the bold-revert-discuss cycle here. --Malthusian (talk) 01:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Category:Living people

I removed Category:living people, I think, its wrong. Do exist a similar category about animals? --Nolanuss 20:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Still alive?

The article says Socks WAS the cat of the Clinton family. According to his birth in 1991 he could still be alive, being 15 years old right now. Does anyone have information? --89.54.161.82 23:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

• Was refers to him no longer being the Clinton's cat. Staxringold _talk^contribs 16:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Socks is alive ? Gridge 11:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• I don't think we know for certain. If he was alive he'd be about 15, which is getting very old for a domestic cat (though they can live longer). I would have thought that if he had died, it would have been in the news - when Humphrey, the Downing Street cat, died it was reported by the BBC at least, and Socks seems to have had similar fame in America. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 15:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I guess... Gridge 12:43, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I could well be wrong about the possibility of his death being reported - stereotypically the British care more about cats and dogs than most, so perhaps an American presidential cat wouldn't have the same attention. In which case we might just have to put a '?' after his birth date in maybe one or two years' time, when he'd be pretty ancient if he was alive, and leave it at that. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 16:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. Gridge 19:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

There are photos of Socks taken in 2005 at Andrews Air Force Base with his new owner, and I located a website which attests that the animal was still extant as of mid-06. Fishhead64 17:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow, yeah, a lot of cats live until their late teen's. Gautam ^Discuss 01:24, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Breed

So what breed is Socks? Doesn't seem to be mentioned in the article. —Lowellian (reply) 09:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Democat. --NEMT 13:26, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Tuxedo cat {black/white} —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.53.145.162 (talk) 03:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

"Tuxedo" is not a breed...it's a coat color pattern (more properly called a "black and white bicolor"). Being a rescue cat originally, Socks was most likely a DSH (domestic short hair)....in other words, a mutt. he was a beautiful cat, and I'm sure Ms. Currie misses him terribly (as anyone who'd had a long-live pet knows, when they leave it takes awhile to get used to them being gone) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.112.239.142 (talk) 22:12, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Cats vs. dogs

I have removed a sentence noting that popular surveys showed more Americans owned cats than dogs; it was unreferenced, and it merely added confusion to the material directly before it - if more Americans have cats, then the joke that Socks was replaced with a dog for political reasons doesn't make sense. And really, there is no reason to elaborate on the tangent of how popular cats are versus dogs, anyways. Brianyoumans 16:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Doonesbury got it wrong

http://www.gocomics.com/doonesbury/2013/04/29

Bush's never had a first cat--that was Socks Clinton Cat! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.72.154 (talk) 12:53, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:President Veroart.jpg

Image:President Veroart.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 15:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

This article needs to be expanded!

...as the image of Socks at the lectern surely bespeaks all that is Cat -- this furry friend's indescribably incredible and utterly brilliant --- charisma! As a long time observer of public affairs I assure fellow Wikipedia editors that Socks is the cat of the twentieth century. Just can't wait for an Oscar-winning film treatment of Socks's bio, with some talented performer playing its lead such as Felix the Cat or The Cat and The Hat or a tremendous new talent discovered from YouTube, I'm not sure, but anyway, who cares about that, the persona of this CAT is just SO INCREDIBLE, I think about it and just get dizzy, please, somebody discover and edit in the coordinates for this miraculously gifted companion and personality's final resting place so that faithful fans such as myself can make pilgrimage and leave tokens of appreciation for this supercalfragerlousiexpialadociously whizbangboingingly wonderful feline. Once exposed to the style, grace, and felinity of this cat makes a person rethink their whole approach to life and never be able to look at anything the same way again forevermore. SOCKS THE CAT...AMAZING...TRULY THE CAT OF CATS...FOREVER!...and to sway those inexplicable few who doubt this estimation, I submit the following summation of his personality and being from one who knew Socks themself on a first-person, human-to-cat basis:

"Socks, my cat, is a cat with a great imagination. He likes to watch TV. When there is a show with tweeting birds, his ears perk up. Then he crouches right in front of the TV. He acts like he wants to jump at the images he sees. When he hears cats meowing or fighting on TV, he begins to howl and acts like he wants to join the fight. This Citzen cat named Socks seems to see himself in another place. When he is staring at TV, could he be transporting himself into an imagined adventure? Who knows what is in the mind of a cat!"----FROM THE BACK COVER OF WHEN SOCKS WENT TO THE WHITE HOUSE (1994)

↜Just me, here, now … 02:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it would be helpful to expand the investigation section in particular- not a lot of detail considering it has its own heading Kayla.kingston (talk) 18:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Name

"Socks Clinton"

Is there any source that says that the cat's full name was "Socks Clinton"? --Millionsandbillions (talk) 16:50, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

132 for "Socks Clinton" from Google News[2][3]--Caspian blue 16:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Discrepancy?

In the intro, the article claims that Socks was a stray cat. But then in the first part of his biography, it's stated that Socks had a sibling named Midnight and that he was apparently living with Chelsea's piano teacher. So which was it? If it was both, this could use some clarification. If it wasn't both, then shouldn't one of these claims about his origin be removed?Adrigon (talk) 22:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps the piano teacher rescued both of them as kittens? 75.76.213.106 (talk) 07:13, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Uncited material in need of citations

I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with reliable, secondary citations, per WP:V, WP:CS, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, WP:BLP, WP:NOR, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 21:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

He eventually lost the position of principal Clinton pet in 1997 when the Clintons acquired Buddy, a Labrador Retriever. Socks found Buddy's intrusion intolerable: according to Hillary Clinton, Socks "despised Buddy from first sight, instantly and forever."

In December 2002, Socks was part of the Little Rock Christmas parade.

In October 2004, Socks made a then-rare public appearance when Currie was guest speaker at an Officers' Spouses Club luncheon at Andrews Air Force Base. Socks accompanied her and took part in a photo op.

It included more than 50 letters written to the First Pets by children and more than 80 photographs of Socks and Buddy.

Socks Goes to the White House – A Cats-eye view of the President's house, written by Kenneth T. Blackshaw with illustrations by Mary Beth Burns was published in 1993.

Socks was a character in If..., Steve Bell's cartoon strip in The Guardian, where he was described as the "world's most powerful cat," and as "Chief of Staff for Fish".

In 1996, Socks appeared on a series of stamps in the Central African Republic with Bill Clinton.

On the 1994 Oscar Brand album I Love Cats, the song "Socks' Song" is dedicated to Socks.

A cartoon of Socks appeared in 2 Stupid Dogs in the episode "The Rise and Fall of Big Dog".

Requested move 15 December 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. While there is some support to move, there is no consensus as which title to move to. Those who oppose are more consistent in their comments and mostly cite PDAB. – robertsky (talk) 06:35, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

---

Socks (cat) → Socks (White House cat) – WP:AT/WP:PRECISE ambiguous disambiguation is a bad idea. The current title should point to the disambiguation page Sock (disambiguation) where multiple cats called "Socks" are listed. This cat was the resident cat in the White House during Bill Clinton's presidency -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 05:13, 15 December 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). 65.92.247.90 (talk) 20:20, 15 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BD2412 T 21:07, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Moved from WP:RMTR

There is no other article on WP that reasonably could use the title "Socks (cat)". Station1 (talk) 08:04, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

No other article, but there are several other Socks cat topics discussed on Wikipedia. Disambiguation is a matter of topics. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:02, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

I see only two others mentioned in other articles and this is the clear primary topic, with over 200 views/day, even if you consider the entirety of the two other articles with different titles.[4] Disambiguation of topics is handled by the hatnote, no need to change titles. Station1 (talk) 18:44, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

WP:AT we are not supposed to use ambiguous titles, the dead Twitter cat Sockington is also called "Socks" per its article. Just because it resides at a different WP:NATURALDAB title does not mean it should be discounted as an existence. The current title is imprecise WP:PRECISE so it should be moved to an unambiguous title. The NATURALDAB title os Socks Clinton, while the recognizable disambiguator is "White House cat" since that's what this cat is known for. An alternate name for a subject (Sockington) does not mean it isn't "Socks"; aside from the fact that "Socks" is also a common cat name -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 20:16, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

“we are not supposed to use ambiguous title”??? A WP:PRIMARYTOPIC article like Paris or Socks (cat) has an ambiguous title by definition. — В²C ☎ 14:49, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

In addition to Sockington, Socks (Blue Peter cat) was the center of a scandal at BBC over falsified poll results, and Socks (novel) is a whole book devoted to the story of a cat named Socks. The Clintons' cat was apparently named after the book character. WP:INCDAB sets a high threshold for partial disambiguation. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:50, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

---

• Support per prior comments above. "Socks" is a relatively common name for a cat, and there are several other Socks cat topics that are notable enough to be discussed on Wikipedia, including the one that inspired the name of the White House cat. The readership interest in a cat that departed from the White House 23 years ago seems likely to continue to fade over time. Partial disambiguation is not justified here. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:14, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support Seems like a rather reasonable and good choice to avoid future possible confusion.★Trekker (talk) 23:39, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
• Comment As someone old enough to have fond memories of Socks, I'd consider this a primary topic. But, yes, as time goes on he will become less known and if not this week it will likely eventually need to be moved. However, Socks (White House cat) seems clunky, so I'd suggest Socks (first cat). (Do we have any other WP articles on presidential pets? None of the ones I can think of seem to have articles, and Socks' notability likely stemmed in part from timing as an early internet phenom.) CAVincent (talk) 02:10, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

  See Major (Joe Biden's dog) and Major (Franklin D. Roosevelt's dog), both of which were German Shepherds that had a tendency to bite. Two RMs about those are recorded at Talk:Major (Joe Biden's dog). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:26, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

  Ah, I see there are actually several including Fala (dog), Buddy (dog), Bo (dog) and Sunny (dog). I'd Oppose move request today and for as long as Socks (cat) remains the primary Socks (cat) topic, following this convention. CAVincent (talk) 02:27, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

  None of those appear to involve WP:INCOMPLETEDAB. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks, those examples are helpful. Following these precedents, a move of this article to Socks (Bill Clinton's cat) may be more appropriate than (White House cat). CAVincent (talk) 02:33, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

  We also have Pete (Theodore Roosevelt's dog), a pit bull that was a vicious biter. Joe Biden's Major was replaced with Commander (dog) after too many biting incidents, but the Commander-in-Chief turned out to be an even worse biter and was impeached and removed from office. Apparently Socks was also a bit violent with Buddy, so he was removed as well. So if you're ever elected president, I recommend a parakeet or a tortoise. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:41, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

  Just found more at United States presidential pets. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:01, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

  "First cat" is basically a made-up term, and we don't do that per WP:AT policy. Also an extremely unlikely search term, so not very useful as a disambiguator. If "first cat" and "first dog" were commonly used terms they would have already been used for disambiguation in previous case like Biden's dog, etc.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:04, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

  Sorry, "first cat" was just a joke on my part while I was trying to think of a better potential move target, as it amused me to suggest that Socks might be the original cat to readers not familiar with American nomenclature around presidential families. Not a real suggestion. In fairness, my later (Bill Clinton's cat) was a serious suggestion for a better alternative. CAVincent (talk) 07:06, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

• Comment I am the nominator; I am OK with the alternative suggestion Socks (Bill Clinton's cat) -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 03:32, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

  Prefer Socks (Clinton’s’ cat). Family cat. SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:18, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

  Then it would be Socks (Clintons' cat). "Clinton's'" isn't standard English, under any style guide. "The Clintons" in the plural, and the way to possessivize an -s plural is to just add the appostrophe after it, so "the Clintons' cat". But the whole problem with this notion in general is that of course there are more people in the world that Bill and Hillary and their progeny named "Clinton", including notable ones like the inimitable and definitely unrelated George Clinton. An attempt at disambiguation that introduces another ambiguity is a failure.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:09, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

  It was a typo. Sorry. I meant Socks (Clintons’ cat). And I’m fighting autocorrect to type that. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:34, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

• Move to Socks (Bill Clinton's cat), to be WP:CONSISTENT with Major (Joe Biden's dog) and Major (Franklin D. Roosevelt's dog). Second choice: Use Socks Clinton. Using "(White House cat)" is a poor idea because it's a much less likely search term, the cat did not belong to the White House as an institution (contrast with several official mousers at various British institutions who resided in those places across the tenures of various people), and Socks lived with B. C. and his family both before and after his presidency. In short, Socks is not actually associated with the White House in particular, but is associated with Bill Clinton in particular. While this cat can be argued to be the primary topic for "Socks (cat)", this may be an especially American viewpoint, and perhaps a generational one, plus the fact that the cat was named after a notable fictional one probably means that the Clinton cat's alleged primacy is temporary. The number of notable potential matches on WP for "Socks" and "cat" is sufficient reason to disambiguate this further, even if this is a bit of an edge case. PS: I would support Socks Clinton as second choice, per some discussion below.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:02, 16 December 2023 (UTC); revised: 22:55, 18 December 2023 (UTC); revised again: 09:02, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
• Comment. According to our article, Socks was the Clinton family cat, not just Bill's. Also according to our article, its name was Socks Clinton, which already redirects here and would be a more WP:Natural title. Station1 (talk) 03:17, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

  That could also work, though "not just Bill's" is not a hair we would split, as we are not splitting it in the other cases with similar names.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:55, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

  I don't think Socks Clinton works. When this article comes up in a reader's search, it should be clear that it is about a cat and not, say, an athlete nicknamed Socks. Having "Socks Clinton" in the lede strikes me as a bit whimsical and possibly unencyclopedic. (Do we give any other pets a family name?) "Socks (Bill Clinton's cat)" would remain clear to readers generations from now that remember the names of 20th century presidents, when Hillary and Chelsea are largely forgotten (and even today, clearer to readers not familiar with US politics of recent decades). CAVincent (talk) 00:53, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

  I don't think it's any more splitting hairs to say "Bill Clinton's cat" is not the best choice than to say "White House cat" is not the best choice. Socks was partly Bill Clinton's cat and the White House cat for a while. Both are partly true but not totally accurate, so not completely encyclopedic. Socks Clinton is both unambiguous and precise; it may or may not be whimsical but is attested to by reliable sources such as The NY Times, so is certainly encyclopedic. Station1 (talk) 19:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

  I'm not fond of "Socks Clinton" either. I guess some people do append human owner surnames to the names of cats and dogs, but it seems like a rather silly and sometimes confusing practice. Somehow though, I also have the impression that this cat belonged more to Clinton's family than to him. It joined the family by way of Chelsea, and it was Hillary who wrote about about him and wore a Socks-themed accessory to the inaugural ball. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

  append human owner surnames to the names of cats and dogs? It is standard at the veterinary clinic. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:36, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. I disagree disambiguation is merely a “matter of topics”; it’s a “matter of topics sufficiently notable to have coverage on WP”. And this is clearly a WP:PDAB because the page views for Socks (cat), Sockington and Socks (Blue Peter cat) are 5534, 421 and 59 respectively. The Clinton cat is clearly WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for this title. —В²C ☎ 15:07, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
• Weak support the views may well not be enough for a PDAB. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:41, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
• Suggest Clinton’s Socks. On reading through the references and a bit beyond, Socks Clinton is not supported, but quality sources do refer in introduction to “Clinton’s Socks”, which I think works well. Notability here is entirely derivative. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:44, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

  Socks (Clinton’s cat) works, noting the cat was originally Chelsea’s. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:47, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

  Socks (Clintons' cat) (note the location of the apostrophe) or Socks (Clinton family cat)? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:55, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

  Clintons’ Socks, apostrophe, of course. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:26, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

  Disambiguating any further by any of these suggestions is the epitome of unnecessary disambiguation. There is only one very well-known cat named Socks, so the current title is best. --В²C ☎ 20:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose, I have to agree with B2C here. This is a solution trying to make a problem to justify it. older ≠ wiser 22:12, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:CRYSTAL. As it stands, this cat's Wikipedia article is the most trafficked in the narrow field of notable cats that are named Socks. Though I personally believe all cats should be equally notable, that just doesn't fly here. Should a feline with comparable notability named Socks emerge, this topic could and should be reopened, but at this time, a move from Socks (cat) to Socks Clinton, Socks (Bill Clinton's cat), Socks (Clinton family cat), Socks (White House cat), or whatever should become the future title of this article, is not justified by the notability of cats in past or in present, at least on WP. I see a move to a more precise disambiguation as unnecessary at this time. This whole suggestion seems like a means to future-proof this particular cat's article against one or more other cats that may claim to be the definitive Socks in an unpredictable future scenario--the antithesis of WP:CRYSTAL applied to animals. — Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 03:19, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose Regardless of what people name their cat, the one on Wikipedia is disambiguated properly. If there are more of such cats, only then does it merit a more specific disambiguation. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

There are more of such cats discussed on Wikipedia – several more of them, in fact. I suggest to read some of the prior comments. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 12:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Not that have their own articles, as far as I can tell. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:54, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

It makes no difference whether topics have "their own articles" or not. WP:DAB applies regardless. And it's not the only one that has an article, for that matter, although that doesn't matter. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to formally close this discussion, but it looks like it's time. It's been over two weeks now, and there doesn't seem to be any consensus to move, with a majority (or at least plurality) opposing the move, and no clear choice of what to move the article to should a move happen. CAVincent (talk) 06:59, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

I have relisted it to give one more chance for a consensus (or at least a clearer consensus) to develop either way. BD2412 T 21:08, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

We just wait until an admin or an RM-experienced uninvolved editor gets to it. — В²C ☎ 04:57, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting for clearer consensus. BD2412 T 21:07, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

• Move to Socks (Bill Clinton's cat). Not the primary topic; see Socks (novel). For the disambiguation tag, I'm going with the precedent set at Major (Joe Biden's dog). Socks belonged to Bill and Hillary, just as Major belongs to Joe and Jill. The notability aspect here is that these pets are the president's pet, so the president's name is the one used in the tag. 162 etc. (talk) 22:04, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose – The name of the article should be as succinct as possible. Svartner (talk) 17:09, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. Haven't any of you ever played Socks the Cat Rocks the Hill? The correct title here is Socks (video game character). Okay, corny joke aside, I agree with B2C; I think it's unlikely, based on the pageviews for all four topics mentioned here, this setup is causing trouble for readers. (And even if the novel was on par with this article, I wouldn't support moving this page anyway, as this Socks actually *is* a cat and not a fictional character; that'd just be hatnote-worthy, not DAB-worthy, IMO. There are articles at (dog) for mutts named Spike, Pal, and Skippy, despite plenty of fictional dogs having those names.) Nohomersryan (talk) 01:41, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.