Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Petition against kitten abuse

Petition against kitten abuse
Any administrator who abuses kittens is a meanie, especially if they do so in the name of Wikipedia. After all, kittens are adorable, and abusing them doesn't benefit Wikipedia. Therefore:
  • We the undersigned, condemn in the strongest possible terms, any administrator that abuses kittens. (And please note that anyone who doesn't sign this obviously condones kitten abuse.)
Shortcut
I can has signachurs?
plz dont hurt us
Server refueling in progress at the WMF data centre.
  1. —David Levy 03:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. THINK OF THE KITTENS. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. @harej 03:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Just look at that image!!! Aw... we all know that most of you are causing God to kill kittens... don't contribute to the problem further by abusing them too! Lara 03:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. I support this, even though Lara has implicitly pointed out that supporting it is probably blasphemous. Just as well I no longer live in Ireland-gadfium 03:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Down with meanie administrators who ignore all rules by abusing kittens! -CapitalQ (talk) 03:42, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. There are certainly a few cluless admins who would freely abuse kittens if only you phrased the reason for doing so in just the right way. So yes, duly condemned. Now, if you could get an ambiguous arbcom motion and a Jimbo half-quote to sort of endorse kitten abuse as Doing Good Work despite what the rest of the right thinking kitten loving world thinks....my God, the inhumanity. MickMacNee (talk) 03:54, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 03:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9. To think, I thought that kitten was a baseball... damnit. — Coffee // have a cup // ark // 04:17, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. I condone abusing kittens, but I love signing petitions. Chillum (Need help? Ask me) 04:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Does this mean that administrators who abuse kittens are not automatically de-sysoped?! In what world have I been living...? Waltham, The Duke of 05:53, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  12. I don't think Mick gets it. Administrators should not be allowed to use their decapitating tool as a method of going on a kitten killing spree. UnitAnode 05:58, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Let's hang the kitten abusers. --Closedmouth (talk) 07:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Where do lolcats come from? Nifky^ 07:37, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Every time God kills a kitten... - Mailer Diablo 07:44, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Camaron · Christopher · talk 10:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  17. LOLKITTEH! Pmlineditor ∞ 10:51, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Especially User:Gracenotes, who hates barnstars too: proof. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 17:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    PS: The Masturbation article has serious WP:NPOV problems, since God killing kittens for it isn't mentioned, delted by anti-feline tagteam sockpuppets. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 17:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  19. You can has signachurs from me. I wont hurt you. I luv kittens. So does my alt account. So i give you both signachurs. jh0367 ☯ ~hugs~ / & / delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 18:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support. I quite like kittens but I couldn't eat a whole one. Franamax (talk) 22:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support and demand PTSD therapy. Even though I disapprove of the emotional solicitation of support !votes with the ridiculous and adorably, pathetically cute images, since I am seriously brought to tears like a pathetic child when I see anything close to this saddening, I feel obligated to volunteer my torso be used for future abuse in exchange for a captive kitten if this fails to reach consensus. My hideous fragility means I can't take much punishment, but it should buy the kitties a little more time at least. ♪ daTheisen(talk) 23:36, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support; and it would be a strong support from me if it included the hamsters. No one ever hurts the hamsters. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support per biographies of living kittens policy. Ucucha 03:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  24. There needs to be a deadminship process for militant Administrators who abuse their tools to abuse their capacity to abuse kittens. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 11:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support OMG, I love kittens!! -- Kendrick7talk 04:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support Penalty for kitten abuse... DEATH --Garrythefish (talk) 18:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Strong Support — I love cats. Really. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 17:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support sign Wikipedia:Administrators against kitten abuse today! - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 05:49, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  29. rawr  rdunnalbatross  10:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Please, think of the server kitteh's! (X! · talk)  · @533  ·  11:47, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support Because if I were to be reincarnated, I would want to be a cat :) The Thing Talk//Sign// color=#D00>Vandalize 15:37, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support Hurting kittens is prima facie evidence of power hunger. Trusilver 16:56, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support cos ILIKEIT. Also, it are fakt. <>Multi‑Xfer<> (talk) 19:21, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Meow Because in the end, with no other alternative, sincere people and others are indeed concerned. --StaniStani  00:03, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support What have the kittens done to deserve such cruel treatment? RadManCF (talk) 16:55, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support Bebeh kitteh so prosh. ike9898 (talk) 22:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support. Mrrrroww. Fffftt Ffffftt, -- Ϫ 05:09, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support Jay Myers (Hurricane Jay) (talk) 19:18, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support I think all animals should just be left alone. Stop messing with them. Davykamanzi → talk  · contribs 15:45, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support Kittehs are pritteh. Rouenpucelle 7:46, 29 May 2012(UTC-8)
  41. Support Kitties are the cutest. If you oppose this, I oppose you. meow c;
  42. Strongest possible veto support I was a kitten once....or so my cats think. #KittensForAdmins2019! --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:27, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Strong support. In particular, kitten huffing must be stopped. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 17:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support Abusing kittens should result in an indefinite block. Scorpions13256 (talk) 22:21, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support Look at that kitten how could you hurt it! The furret lover (talk) 20:59, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  46. OH MY GOD Support #SaveTheKittens Clyde (please @ me if replying) (talk) 23:25, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support. Please take my signature! GreatLakesShips 🤘 (talk - contribs) 14:18, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support I am also against kitten abuse. Facebook would ban you—and in that vein I then say: so should Wikipedia. Altanner1991 (talk) 06:50, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Obviously Support All kittens and cats are my icons! FireStarDog (talk) 24:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  50. All kitten abusers need to be desysopped, banned, and beheaded. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Users opposed to this petition

edit
  1.  
    Here kittykittykitty... :)
    Oppose. No consensus. Recommend WP:PITCHFORKS, no fewer than three ArbCom cases, the appointment of a special committee and possible referral to a higher authority. Issues to be addressed before this resolution can be passed include the definition of "abuse", when a "kitten" ceases to be such (my cat has delayed puberty and still looks extremely cute), equal protection for puppies (as well as the resultant debate about whether dogs or cats make better pets), why this is aimed at administrators (is it a plot by their enemies?), why kittens and/or puppies are being protected when equally cute polar bears are drowning every day, whether the preceding argument is a hoax, and whether this is all a plan by the IRC cabalists who use _Cat in their nicknames (you know who you are). Once we settle all that, we're ready to pass the resolution. Then we can move to begin discussions about whether or not to make a proposal to take some sort of action and possibly get to the RfC stage. Recognizance (talk) 07:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but what if arbcom says that kitten abuse is within administrative discretion? Chillum (Need help? Ask me) 15:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    If worse comes to worst, we can get Robespierre and company to overthrow the God-King and his cronies. Recognizance (talk) 16:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Per above. PeterSymonds (talk) 10:26, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Per DragonHawk. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 12:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong Oppose. I quite like killing kittens, and no man, woman or small furry child is telling me I can't. In addition, this violates the 1st Amendment by not allowing me to do exactly what I want (that's what the 1st amendment does, right? I mean, everyone I see on the internet treats it like that). Ironholds (talk) 16:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no First Amendment protection for lolbrits. Then again, I forgot. Wikipedia is American. Everyone knows that. Time to go "fix" some more of your spelling. Recognizance (talk) 16:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Fix my spelling after you fix your democracy, tubby. Ironholds (talk) 16:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps you should worry about passing RfA before you act like statements concerning administrators apply to you. (I win.) Recognizance (talk) 16:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. The odd kick won't hurt 'em. Too much.  GARDEN  16:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose. Too many kittens currently. —Emufarmers(T/C) 17:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Weak Oppose - I...I just don't get it, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 17:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose Killing kittens is healthy and natural. -- EA Swyer Talk Contributions 21:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Strongest possible oppose Isn't killing kittens the objective of Kitten Cannon? You people need to get a life :P  fetchcomms☛ 22:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Oppose - Establishing artificial rules that interfere with a natural ecological balance is fraught with danger. Cats are an introduced cosmopolitan species, and they tend to wreak havoc on native species. Kitten killing, especially in those areas that have no foxes or other natural cat predators, prevents cats from becoming apex predators. You have to be cruel to be kind. There are people starving in this world, and kittens are nutritious and tasty. Think of it as feline veal. - Richard Cavell (talk) 22:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Cats are the worst. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:39, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  12. OPPOSE  People. People! PEOPLE!! Have you forgotten that kittens grown up to become CATS??!! They are the scourge of puppies everywhere! — SpikeToronto 05:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Oppose I view petitions against kitten abuse as prima facie evidence of kittenhood. Sounds like someone trying to save their arse to me. Fleetflame · whack! whack! · 21:59, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Oppose again because....that's what she said. Fleetflame · whack! whack! · 22:02, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  15. No consensus that kittens are notable. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 11:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Psh, there's a whole article on the subject! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 15:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    That article is quite clearly POV, SYN, COI, ABC, TROUT, SPIDERMAN, and AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTD; obviously written by a militant activist member of the kitten lobby. Please delete it. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 20:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree with deletion, per WP:OMGWTFBBQ - nn cruft. Fleetflame · whack! whack! · 20:30, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Kill them all, God will know his own. RayTalk 20:24, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Oppose, I've seen no indication that kitten abuse is a problem on this project so this is rule creep. Moreover, the notion that kitten abuse is necessarily a bad thing is extremely POV. Take your politics and ideology elsewhere. JoshuaZ (talk) 21:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Obligatory badger, badger, badger, mushroom, snaaaaake. --StaniStani  18:06, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Oppose This proposal completely ignores the much wider problem of admins deleting puppies without consensus, and does not acknowledge the exceedingly cruel treatment of shaved, declawed hamsters by ArbCom. I propose that the anyone in the support section be drawn and quartered, and that their remains be fed to whatever dogs Jimbo may have as an object lesson in the dangers of daring to point out the silliness inherent in certain other "petition." Beeblebrox (talk) 22:39, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Strongest possible oppose. The indiscriminate way in which kittens are allowed to thrive on Wikipedia, thanks to the power vacuum at policy level caused by the effective abdication of responsibility by Jimmy Wales and the inability (and undesirability) of the corrupt and ineffectual Arbcom to take firm action regarding kitten-proliferation, is a clear symptom of the internal contradictions which are destroying the credibility of Wikipedia as a reference source. The policy of so-called "civility" towards kittens may have been a viable option in the early days when Wikipedia was a monocultural group, but for a global project it's unviable and laughable; what constitutes "kitten abuse" to the West Coast clique who dominate Wikipedia's policymaking may be considered a perfectly acceptable means of kitten-treatment in other cultures, in many of which the appropriate treatment of kittens would be using them as footballs, skinning them for fur or baking them in a large pie. The refusal of Wikipedia's corrupt and self-electing administrative corps to deal with the obvious kitten problem is a sign of the cancer which is eating away at Wikipedia. I have no problem with kittens on Wikipedia if they act in an appropriate way and don't draw attention to their four-legs-and-tail status, but when all is said and done, those who pee in the corner while making pathetic mewling noises should be treated differently to those who are here to build an encyclopedia. – iridescent 20:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I demand you retract this egregious personal attack on me. Who told you I like to pee in the corner while making weird noises anyway? I demand an investigation into this attempted outing! I also demand cupcakes! With lots of frosting! Beeblebrox (talk) 20:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I am sorry and do not intend this as a personal attack. However, on reading the relevant legislation, it appears clear that under Florida law, eating dead garbage, puking on pillows and only realizing ones inability to climb down trees once halfway up, are in and of themselves prima facie evidence of felinity. The potential for litigiation in the lack of a clear legal framework for dealing with kittens, coupled with academic studies which appear to show a clear negative correlation between pointyness of ears and the ability to write with clarity and make accurate decisions, means I am unable with a clear conscience to support the activities of kittens on Wikipedia. – iridescent 21:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Oppose Kittens heal. Mattresses don't. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 06:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Oppose per my caption here. LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:46, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Oppose and counterattack! Every year ten thousands of innocent swimmers are torn to shreds by bloodthirsty sea kittens, every year ten thousands of unaware pedestrians are shot slyly by merciless sniper kittens and every year ten thousands of defenceless air passengers are killed by unscrupulous kamikaze kittens - so how long shall we suffer this butchery, yet? ~~ Phoe talk ~~ 20:36, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Oppose. Of course "Kitten abuse" sounds bad - that's the whole function of demagogic words like "abuse", to make things disapproved of sound bad. In fact, though, there's no evidence that responsible use of kittens causes any sort of long-term problems other than those that result from societal disapproval, and plenty of evidence that the occasional use of kittens can significantly lower stress. If we want to end "Kitten abuse", we could do so right now simply by never using that phrase again. — Gavia immer (talk) 22:26, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree with above, and move to open a petition for legalization of kitten consumption for medicinal use. – ClockworkSoul 22:36, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Oppose Kitten abuse is a stress reliever for administrators. It aids them in improving and maintaining wikipedia. If a rule outlawing kitten abuse were instigated, it would be ignored per WP:IAR. And therefore it is a pointless rule. 94.197.93.59 (talk) 00:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Oppose Too many kittehs causes a catsplosion. caknuck ° needs to be running more often 03:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  26. I haven't stopped beating my wife, either. Sceptre (talk) 18:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    None of us has stopped beating your wife. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:57, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Delete per WP:NOT#LOLCATS. As has been pointed out to me numerous times in the past, and will doubtless be pointed out to me again in future, there is no place for humour in Wikipedia. --Helen Lovejoy (talk) 12:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC). PS: Will someone please think of the Domo-kuns?[reply]
  28. Oppose. The idea of a group of Wikipedians, aiming to promote in any way, an opinion only shared by a select group of Wikipedians, and then force it onto the whole Wikipedia, and call anything that moves even slightly, outside of the general thinking spectrum an Ailurophobe is, frankly, fascist. I will not take part in the condoning of such activities. Dunutubble (talk) 20:28, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

edit
  1. Neutral. Look, this shit has got to stop. As someone who used to maim kittens from time to time, I understand where the opposition is coming from and they have my sympathies. But that's not me anymore, and I also "get it" when it comes to the rationale behind starting this petition in the first place. We must stop this insane war, and I'd like to think of myself as the kind of person who could get the kitten lovers, the kitten killers, and perhaps even the kittens to sit down together and figure this whole thing out. Okay fine I could never get the kittens to sit down, but maybe the other two. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 22:14, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I have seen no statistical confirmation of any deleterious effects that killing kittens has on the project. Ah, hell, that means I should have opposed this damn petition! It's all so confusing... UnitAnode 05:52, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral The arguments for and against kitten abuse are compelling. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:45, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Neutral. "Abuse" is not clearly defined. Kitten maiming, for example, would be right out. But Bonsai Kittens, that's okay. --Elonka 18:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Neutral I am not convinced by the arguments of those opposing. --StaniStani  22:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC) — Stanistani (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits to this petition outside the "support" section.[reply]
  5. Neutral: while I find myself emotionally swayed by the arguments of the "support" voters, they largely do not follow, or even make reference to, Wikipedia policy, especially our our existing guideline on kitten welfare. Cremastra (talk) 00:26, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

edit
  1. Merge with chicken. It would be delicious! – ClockworkSoul 06:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merger - think of the chickens! Yummy, yummy chickens. Ivanvector (talk) 06:36, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merger We already have Turducken running rough shod all over us thanks to Arbcoms Thanksgiving amnesty! Beeblebrox (talk) 21:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Kittens already taste like chicken - it's the default flavouring, dontcha know (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:46, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Oppose Merger and Motion to Merge with Spam" :) Rin tin tin (talk) 13:41, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Merge with bunny into cabbit to transform all kittens and bunnies into cabbits like Ryo-Ohki. All kittens must be surgically combined with bunnies to create the cutest mammal possible. This would have the added benefit that we could merge the famous Cat Island, the other Cat Island, and Rabbit Island into one single Cabbit Island. Yetisyny (talk) 20:35, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I think you mean bnuuy. –Sincerely, A Lime 18:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Petition_against_kitten_abuse&oldid=1247136816"