This article is ratedC-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

CatsTop‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Cats. This project provides a central approach toCat-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editingthe article, and help usassess and improve articles togood and1.0 standards, or visit thewikiproject page for more details.CatsWikipedia:WikiProject CatsTemplate:WikiProject CatsCats Top This article has been rated asTop-importance on theproject's importance scale. MammalsLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofmammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale.

There is arequest, submitted by Catfurball, for anaudio version of this article to be created. For further information, seeWikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. The rationale behind the request is: "Important".

I believe that the scientific name for this cat is Oncifelis guigna --Filll19:58, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Itwas. It has been moved intoLeopardus. -UtherSRG(talk)20:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture—The precedingunsigned comment was added by69.118.119.129 (talk •contribs).

So? Not much we can do with that pic. -UtherSRG(talk)03:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any particular reason? :P69.118.127.79 (talk)08:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can't be displayed.Editor abcdef (talk)03:30, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was under the impression that the kodkod was much smaller than 11-14 kilograms. I thought it was more like 4-6 lbs. I didn't want to edit it with out being sure so I thought that this would be a good place to put this. I viewed this article about 6 months ago and remember it saying that the kodkod was smaller than the average housecat. Also, if it is 11-14 kilograms, then someone should change the first sentance where it is called the smallest cat in the Americas. Let it be known that I just now looked at the previous entries for this page and saw that my memories were accurate. What led to the change?—Precedingunsigned comment added bySakdsfhsl (talk •contribs)08:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I confirm the comment above. This animal is the size of a small domestic cat variety and weighs perhaps 2 - 3 kg. I take the opportunity to rail about "kodkod". Kodkod, colocolo, is an indigenous (mapudungun) word that applies to any nocturnal animal or ghost. This name is already applied to Leopardus colocolo. In all its range L. guigna is known as "huiña", sometimes spelt "güigna", and this is also the name given to it in the 18th century by Molina: Felis guigna. People unwilling to pronounce "huiña" say "gato montés", which means wild cat, but that would be the right designation for feral domestic cat. No other animal but L. guigna is named huiña. Replacing good unambiguous and generally accepted vernacular names of species by neologisms increases confusion with no benefit.--Lupo Manaro18:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mammal Species of the World (3rd ed 2005) is the de facto official listing of common names for mammals. The entry forthis species clearly calls it "Kodkod". IUCN, the World Conservation Union,lists both "Kodkod" and "Chilean Cat" as the English language common names for this species, with "Guigna" and "Guina" as the Spanish and French language names. As this is the English language Wikipedia, we use the English language common name. -UtherSRG(talk)19:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A recent edit changed the text to use guiña rather than kodkod throughout the text of the article. I reverted it as the article title and text should be consistent. Here I want to raise the issue of a page move. Should we use guiña, as the IUCN redlist currently does? —  Jts1882 | talk 16:31, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@83d40m andBhagyaMani: Opinions? —  Jts1882 | talk 16:35, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

YES, great idea! Because a) all the modern, i.e. post-2003 articles, use Guigna or Guiña in titles, especially the many not yet referenced articles by Chilean and Argentinian authors; and b) I also like this native name much better. Guigna is easier found than Guiña, though, as for typing the ñ, users need a Spanish keyboard layout. --BhagyaMani (talk)18:56, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It does seem to me that the guiña name has been more commonly used than "kodkod" in the last decade or so, although the latter is still used in a number of sources. I don't feel strongly about it, but it seems a reasonable suggestion. We can, of course, create a redirect from "guigna" if that's a common alternative spelling (haven't seen it myself as a common name, but I may just not have been looking in the right sort of places).Anaxial (talk)21:42, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to be conservative on animal names and oppose replacement of traditional English language names with imported words until they become widely used. Here I don't feel that strongly as kodkod is hardly a household name and guiña is being used more recently. I have an issue with the accent, as that makes editing more difficult and we're likely to find people adding guina (without accent). I'd be happier moving to the anglicised name, guigna, but I'm not sure if this can be supported by sources. Kodkod is used by MSW3 and ADW, guiña by the IUCN and ASM-MDD, and guigna by some older scientific papers and sites geared to the lay reader (e.g.Big Cat Rescue). —  Jts1882 | talk 08:41, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• C-Class Cats articles
• Top-importance Cats articles
• WikiProject Cats articles
• C-Class mammal articles
• Low-importance mammal articles
• WikiProject Mammals articles
• Spoken Wikipedia requests