Talk:Obesity in pets: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Peter J. King (comments) |
imported>Subpagination Bot m (Add {{subpages}} and remove checklist (details)) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{subpages}} | ||
}} | |||
According to what principle should this be titled [[obese pets]] while the "pet" article is titled [[pet]] and not [[pets]]? --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 16:59, 25 January 2007 (CST) | According to what principle should this be titled [[obese pets]] while the "pet" article is titled [[pet]] and not [[pets]]? --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 16:59, 25 January 2007 (CST) | ||
Latest revision as of 07:14, 11 November 2007
According to what principle should this be titled obese pets while the "pet" article is titled pet and not pets? --Larry Sanger 16:59, 25 January 2007 (CST)
I'd actually name it something else, like Obesity in pets. I think the title should reflect that the article is a synthesis of obesity and pet.
Also, I think it would be useful to have information on "how to tell if your pet is obese". I know (since my dad is a veterinarian) that there's some sort of guideline involving palpation around the rib cage or lower rib cage. -- ZachPruckowski (Speak to me) 12:17, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
- I came here to suggest renaming to "Obese pet", but "Obesity in pets" is better, I think. With regard to the last comment, I'd be worried about offering advice; stating a sourced set of guidelines would be OK, though. --Peter J. King Talk 10:02, 4 April 2007 (CDT)