Talk:Creme Puff (cat): Difference between revisions

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 July 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Cats Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cats. This project provides a central approach to Cat-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.CatsWikipedia:WikiProject CatsTemplate:WikiProject CatsCats articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Ageing and culture (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ageing and culture, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Ageing and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Ageing and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Ageing and cultureAgeing and culture articles

The link links to the Guiness Book of World Records, but to a cat named "Spike" who's purported to be 31. What gives? --Ramdrake 20:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is very ambiguous--164.77.84.202 03:30, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Creme Puff doesn't seem to be verifiable, but Spike definitely died at age 31. However, it's unclear whether these cites are for "oldest cat ever" or "oldest living cat." I'm assuming the change in the Guinness Record is for the latter, and would therefore change as the oldest cat died. Guinness' website doesn't list anything about old cats now, and I don't have access to the book. 76.215.13.97 03:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2007 Guinness book definitely cites Creme Puff as oldest-ever recorded cat. No info on the current oldest living cat.76.215.13.97 22:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: BBC Page on spike [1] Telecine Guy 07:29, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I added this link [2] to the 2010 Guiness records book (p. 320 bottom), featuring Creme Puff. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 19:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think Guinesss got it wrong mistaking Creme Puss with Grandpa. There's NO other reliable source on Creme Puff and no mention of her in 1999, or even earlier this year any ANY news source. Perry even said he sent in the wrong date for Granpa, perhaps there's been a mixup??? - Stillwaterising (talk) 02:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What you "think" is irrelevant. The Guinness Records are acceptable references. If you think they have it wrong, you should take it up with them. If Guinness ammend their information, THEN this article should be edited or tagged NOT before.86.177.36.23 (talk) 02:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What he thinks *is not* irrelevant. Stillwaterising has brought up a contraversy that is not just a question here, but in cat forums as well. Guinness Records might be an "acceptable" reference, but that does not mean its content is accurate. In this case, it it not. =//= Johnny Squeaky 05:39, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We don't even have enough to show there is a controversy never mind argue that the Guinness Book of Records is wrong. A lot more is needed before turning this into the cat equivalent of Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories. Citation needed before going any further with this. Dmcq (talk) 09:26, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that clearly there *is* a controversy as several editors here as well as a significant number of knowledgeable parties in various forums devoted to cats question the veracity of this story. How about this: I will devote some time this week in tracking down references that fall within the "acceptable to Wikipedia" category. If I'm unable to locate any that are acceptable to all the interested parties here, I'll be happy to "clam up" and back off my view that there should be a "dispute" tag. I that acceptable? =//= Johnny Squeaky 03:46, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well since you haven't any evidence at the moment I'll take off the disputed tag. You can put it on again when you have something tenable. Dmcq (talk) 23:09, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, this is weird. A domestic house cat that lived until 38? It’s hard to believe. Skepticism might be called for here. Viriditas (talk) 20:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's a lot of weird things.

Guinness is happy the evidence is enough, and we know they've revoked other similar claims for lack of evidence (note the oldest dog title got revoked at a point).

And in the 12 years since, it seems like no real evidence against the claim, or particularly strong controversy, was caused.

Creme Puff *is* the world's oldest cat, officially speaking, and the evidence available presently points to that being true.

But if you're skeptical, find sources which back up that skepticism, and insert a paragraph citing them.

2A02:C7C:C4CD:A500:D533:9D0B:6DA4:2755 (talk) 23:51, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The breed in question did not exist at the time this cat was purported to have been born. This is both unverified and unverifiable, and simply improbable. It would have been much more believable if it had been a tabby, but folks, the sphinx is a genetic mutation that simply did not exist in 1967. =//= Johnny Squeaky 03:33, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The *fact of the matter* is that there *IS* controversy surrounding this cat and the claim, and it *HAS* been referred to as a Sphinx by the owner. =//= Johnny Squeaky 18:01, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain why you re-added the hoax tag? All mention of the cat's breed have been removed from the article. The claim that Creme Puff was the world's longest-lived cat is sourced to Guinness World Records, so the only justification I can see for the hoax tag is if you believe that Guinness is not a reliable source. It seems all other sources on this article that mention Creme Puff also use Guinness as their source.

That the cat's breed have been removed is irrelevant since the cat in question is still the same cat regardless of if the article tells us the breed. The cat was a Sphinx (as reported elsewhere in numerous articles), an unknown breed at the purported time of birth. If the Guinness World Records says this is the "oldest cat", it has been taken by the hoax, and is inaccurate. =//= Johnny Squeaky 03:03, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This may or may not be related, but I have added the {{undue}} tag to the section on Perry and his other long-lived cat in accordance with WP:COATRACK. This article should be about Creme Puff, and discussion of her owner and the owner's other cat should not take up more space than discussion of Creme Puff herself. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I think I now understand where you're coming from. I will replace the {{hoax}} tag with {{disputed}}. The hoax tag is for articles that are created in a deliberate attempt to spread misinformation, while the disputed tag is for articles that do not fall into that category, but where we still doubt the article's factual accuracy. I highly doubt the creator and subsequent good-faith editors to this article were trying to deliberately spread misinformation; they were simply trying to write an article on something covered by what appear to be reliable sources. It sounds like the issue is that you doubt the source(s) given because of something you know yourself about the subject matter. I recommend you raise this issue with WP Cats and/or WP:RSN - regulars at the latter may be able to tell if there are/have been reliability problems with Guinness. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:18, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone ahead and posted a question at WP:RSN. See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Reliability_of_Guinness_World_Records. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:41, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well I had a look around and seemingly the mutation for hairlessness occurs every so often and there was a hairless cat in France at the same time as that Canadian one that started up the Canadian Sphynx breed. Dmcq (talk) 16:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's something with a bit more about the ones in France [3] Dmcq (talk) 16:59, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief. This article is not about hairless mutations, it's about a specific cat which was, according to its owner, a "Sphinx". A very old cat for sure, but not as old as the owner says, if as he also says, it was a "Sphinx". BUT, I accept "disputed" vs. "hoax", that makes sense. =//= Johnny Squeaky 03:12, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The cat the article is about wasn't even the hairless one. It was another cat that was very old at the same place that was a hairless cat. So yes even sillier than you thought. Also there is good evidence there were hairless cats in Paris at the time the other cat was born, just they were not part of the same line that led to the current Canadian Sphynx breed. Dmcq (talk) 11:02, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've read an article where the owner defined the breed. I'm sure there were hairless cats (perhaps) at the needed time, but that doesn't speak to this cat. I'll look around this week, and if I can't support my belief, I'll shut up about it. I promise. =//= Johnny Squeaky 03:49, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now this here's daddy and i'll have u boys know that all this fussin an fitin is keepin daddy up. spankings for everyone!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.21.99.138 (talk) 12:56, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why does everyone seem to think the Guinness Book is some sort of unimpeachable source? It's a populist book, about as scientific as Ripley's Believe It Or Not.

Because it was ridiculous. An article looks better without them, factual or not. There should never be more text in the stupid tags than in the article itself. They reduce the readability of articles, they are insulting to the authors (If I spent hours on an article and it got tagged, I'd just delete it) and they ridicule the Wikipedia site. Let's face it, the majority of articles on Wiki are tagged one way or another, some have been tagged for years. It is clear that Wikipedia is NEVER going to attain the standard it aspires to, it will never even come close in fact. So the continued fruitless effort to reach this impossible level of quality by you "troll taggers" turns the entire site into a pathetic joke. Articles should be left clean and any disputes limited to the talk pages.86.177.36.23 (talk) 02:35, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter how the article "looks"; if there is an issue with the article, especially one where editor(s) question the factual accuracy of the article, that needs to be plainly spelled out on the article. I understand the issue you raise, but the tags on this article are not "drive-by" tags; both of them are addressed on this talk page. That is the point of maintenance tags - to call readers' attention to a potential issue with the article. Do not remove them without addressing the issues raised. If you have a problem with the issue of maintenance tags as a whole, please take it up at the village pump. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:14, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree removing the tags for the reasons given was wrong. But I believe all the issues have now been dealt with and there doesn't seem much more about it so I'll remove those tags. Dmcq (talk) 14:59, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had actually given second thought to reinstating the disputed tag but had to leave the computer and didn't get a chance to re-remove it. After getting some comments regarding the reliability of Guinness at WP:RSN, I am convinced of its reliability and unless Johnny Squeaky (talk · contribs) can provide some reliable source evidence disputing the Guinness source, then the dispute is mainly OR.

However, I still believe that the WP:COATRACK nature of the "Creme Puff and Jake Perry's other long-lived cat" section has not been resolved and will re-add the undue tag. As I said above, discussion of another cat owned by the same owner should not dwarf discussion of this cat. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was a participant in the dispute over the {{hoax}} tag several months ago. Here is what I understand was the resolution of that dispute:

• The claim that Creme Puff was the longest lived cat relies solely on publication in Guinness World Records. GWR is generally held to be a reliable source on Wikipedia, but like all reliable sources they are subject to being incorrect or duped by hoaxes. Relevant discussion on the reliability of GWR can be found at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_120#Reliability_of_Guinness_World_Records.
• The above claim is disputed on cat discussion forums. Forums are not considered reliable sources on Wikipedia, and no editor has come forth with reliable sources that contradict the claims made by GWR.
• Since no editor has produced reliable sources contradicting the reliable sources on the article, the {{hoax}} tag is not appropriate.

Did I misunderstand anything? —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not a thing. --Seduisant (talk) 19:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the {{one source}} tag to the top of the article. I realize that there are multiple references on the article; however, all of them are dependent on the Guinness source to verify the claim that Creme Puff was the longest-lived cat. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:33, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The CNN article doesn't reference Guinness. Isn't CNN a good news source? It just kind of seems that you're all stressing about this with no real evidence to back up the stress, and it makes for an ugly article. It sounds as if some people above might have some personal preferences that are coloring how to apply the rules. 130.76.96.145 (talk) 17:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CNN is a reliable source and you are correct that it doesn't reference Guinness. However, it also doesn't mention Creme Puff and therefore doesn't do a thing to further establish the notability of Creme Puff or verify the whole reason why she is notable for her own Wikipedia article. The subject of this article is Creme Puff, and discussion of her owner's other cat should not exceed discussion on Creme Puff. It doesn't matter if the maintenance tags make the article "ugly", because the undue weight given to the other cat already makes the article "ugly". —KuyaBriBri^Talk 18:31, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://messybeast.com/longevity.htm Many people think that, because most cats expire before their 15th year, no cats will be alive 10 years later. Most cats do, to date, expire by their 15th, though quite a few reach 20, and the oldest cat currently is 24, but she is by no means the oldest ever. And Creme Puff, whose age was verified sufficiently for Guinness to anoint as oldest ever, has a number of comperes, as outlined in the link. It is true that sometimes there are errors, misidentification, or outright hoax, but they do not negate the fact that quite a number of cats have been documented to have attained ancient status.184.148.67.103 (talk) 18:24, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That "oldest cat" from back then is now 30 years old and still alive by the way. 38 seems a bit high, but I think reaching 30 and more is quite possible for many cats if seen globally. I don't think we can cut to "15 years and then it must be over" - it depends on so many factors, both intrinsic and extrinsic. 2A02:8388:1641:8380:3AD5:47FF:FE18:CC7F (talk) 23:27, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty skeptical of the age of 38. My cat died last year just under the age of 21. My neighbor has a cat who is 25 (and looks it). 38 sounds like a fantasy. I should also point out that the image of the cat in the article that says it is 28-29 is absurd. That photo is of a cat that is around 15-20 or younger. I've been around a lot of senior cats, and that is not a 28 year-old cat. My neighbor's 25 year-old cat looks like it crawled out of a tomb and could turn to sand any moment. Also, a lot of the claims in the article are suspect. Cats hate broccoli and coffee, although one could argue they will drink coffee with cream. I very much doubt this cat lived to 38. This sounds like a variation of the "everything is bigger in Texas" meme. Viriditas (talk) 21:36, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While I can’t comment on the veracity of Cream Puff’s age, some of your statements here are generalizations/assumptions that are not necessarily accurate. “Cats hate broccoli and coffee” seems like an generalized assumption based on personal experience rather than a verifiable fact.

Obviously cats are obligate carnivores in general, but plenty of individual cats have been known to eat unusual things that wouldn’t normally be a part of their diet. One of my cats has a bad habit of trying to eat tissues. She also tries to drink my almond milk and my tea, regularly eats houseplants (including indoor herb gardens), and once ate a fake plastic cat treat from one of my kid’s toy cat sets.

So I don’t think the assumption that cats hate broccoli and coffee (especially without a source) is solid evidence against any of the claims in this article.

That aside, I also found the photo questionable, both due to the listed corresponding age in the caption, and the fact that its source is listed as a YouTube video. Catfrost (talk) 08:04, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The photograph supposedly representing Creme Puff is actually of Olive, a British cat, and was the promoted Oldest Living Cat at the time of Creme Puff's death (hence the confusion -as many articles address both cats and there are nearly no photographs of Creme Puff circulating on the internet). See: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2763014/Is-Olive-world-s-oldest-moggy-whisker-Feline-lays-claim-title-turning-24-115-cat-years.html

The only good video or photo evidence for Grandpa or Creme Puff I've come across is in the form of an old Guiness Prime Time installment just after Grandpa's Death. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRZWMftr9Ks Creme Puffs is clearly not a tuxedo cat, but a somewhat heavy set female white/creme and dilute gray/brown tabby mixed breed or mutt/moggie. See 2:30 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=xRZWMftr9Ks#t=150

This video should probably be added as a reference and perhaps a screen-capture could be used for Creme Puff's photo. (possibly Grandpa's as well) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kool kitty89 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done, I've updated the photo with a screenshot. Brandmeister^talk 21:55, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where did the info in the caption come from? It states she is 28-29 in that photo. Is there a solid source on that, or is it speculation/from questionable sources? Catfrost (talk) 08:07, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kool kitty89: But when was the photo taken? When did "Guiness Prime Time" (typo of "Guinness Prime Time") air? Calculations considering

• Creme Puff (cat) and
• Guinness World Records Primetime

are: https://www.timeanddate.com/date/durationresult.html?m1=08&d1=03&y1=1967&m2=07&d2=27&y2=1998 - "30 years, 11 months, 24 days excluding the end date."

Does "Guinness Prime Time" mean "Guinness World Records Primetime"? Yes, it does. --User123o987name (talk) 21:30, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What's her cause of Death? LucianoTheWindowsFan (talk)

Probably old age. Watchsmart (talk) 07:13, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Watchsmart too much red wine. Coldupnorth (talk) 00:51, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article states that Granpa Rexs Allen was born in Paris, Texas, but the source cited says that he was born in Paris, France. https://web.archive.org/web/20100226035922/http://www.petpublishing.com/catkit/articles/grandpa.shtml Additionally, the article originally had the birthplace of Granpa Rexs Allen as Paris, France. The change from Paris, France to Paris, Texas was made without an edit summary to explain why. Is there something I'm missing? TigerQS (talk) 03:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed it to Paris as the source states that although the whole thing is more than likely a hoax. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:52, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both alcohol and coffee are extremely toxic to cats. The claim from Creme Puff's owner that he fed her either of these in any quantity is contrary to science and therefore highly dubious as to its truthfulness.^[1][2] Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 00:45, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The whole story is quite obviously a hoax given he managed to have two exceptionally long lived cats, unfortunately no reliable source cares about this story to investigate/call it out. Traumnovelle (talk) 01:21, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely correct - if you look at the newspaper reporting of Perry's previous record breaking cat (also 'verified' by Guinness), then it appears to have aged 5 years between 1996 and 1998 before having a further year added to its age at the time of its death - conveniently just enough to surpass the previous record holder. Moreover the Sphynx cat breed smentioned on its documents didn't even exist at the time it was supposed to have been born. If this cat's record was dubious, then it also throws the record for Perry's second cat into serious doubt, particularly as the diet he claims to have fed it is clearly fantasy.Svejk74 (talk) 12:25, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the source linked for alcohol being “extremely toxic to cats” is a pet poison resource. It is not particularly toxic due to a lack of enzyme or something, it’s just that cats are so small that nearly any amount of alcohol is too much. Whether or not an eyedropper of red wine would provide health benefits is up for discussion but there’s no reason to believe it would cause acute toxicity. Teletletketes (talk) 03:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ethanol toxicity is a thing in cats. Feeding a cat alcohol, even in small amounts would certainly cause health effects that would make such longevity impossible. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:47, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ethanol toxicity is a thing in humans also. You didn’t respond to anything I said. Since the threshold is so low for cats, a pet poison resource is going to err on the side of caution and say any level is harmful. But cats do possess the ADH enzyme which metabolizes ethanol. An eye dropper of red wine is roughly a milliliter- an extremely small amount. Teletletketes (talk) 13:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]