Talk:Pet humanization
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This Article reads like ChatGPT wrote it.
[edit]Please rewrite the article to sound significantly less artificial, thanks. Devann (talk) 11:03, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Edited Anthrozoology section
[edit]Agree with Devann on the article's artificial tone. I edited the Anthrozoology section down, as it contributed almost no new information and was obviously generated via AI. I'm not sure the section is needed at all, but feel free to give input. Fluxjupyter (talk) 01:18, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed. The beginning of the article with the "It is important to note" fired off all alarm bells in my head. Putting the article through GPTZero shows 100% probability of AI generated content, but I'm not sure how reliable that tool is for content on wikipedia due to possible overfitting. Octopirate (talk) 00:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Biased to an anthropocentric reading
[edit]How much of this is due to generative AI or the intent of the original author I can't determine (the title comes from an consumer discretionary report by the Binghamton Investment Fund rather than an academic source) but the article is structured to reinforce the central claim of these pet owners anthropomorphizing their pets with virtually non-existent connection to the larger study of animal rights and ethics. It expects us to take that core tenet at face value without any criticism, downplays any valid judgement of animal cognition pet owners make without justification, and the further reading section treats the subject like a mental illness. It's my opinion that adding a "criticism" section, merging it with anthropomorphism or deleting it outright should be considered. 94.2.119.223 (talk) 23:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
@SurgeArrest: Was any part of this article written by generative AI? Jarble (talk) 15:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Kinfo Pedia edits
[edit]@Kinfo Pedia your additions to this article are problematic for various reasons. For example:
1. You claim Most pet owners ensure that their pets will be taken care of and adopted when they can no longer take care of them.
You support this with a citation to a story about an eccentric millionaire who left money to his dog. This does not support the statement that "MOST" pet owners do anything.
2. You claim The pet food industry has contributed to pet humanization.
and cite it to an article about a History Channel show about the history of pet food. Nothing in that article mentions pet humanization, and in any case the History Channel is an unreliable source (WP:RSPHISTORY).
3. You include several long Bible quotes about animals that have nothing to do with pet humanization or pets at all.
This material clearly does not belong in this article. CodeTalker (talk) 21:37, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Start-Class animal articles
- Low-importance animal articles
- WikiProject Animals articles
- Start-Class culture articles
- Low-importance culture articles
- WikiProject Culture articles
- Start-Class psychology articles
- Low-importance psychology articles
- WikiProject Psychology articles
- Start-Class Veganism and Vegetarianism articles
- Low-importance Veganism and Vegetarianism articles
- WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism articles