This is really specific to a single question, it's not a duplicate meta post and for crap's sake people, it's meta, you can have a few uniques floating around.

That having been said, Recommendations for introducing kittens to adult cats had the original 8-vote answer quoting multiple lines directly from the source removed. There was much warning, hoo-hah, and opportunity given to the OP to paraphrase the text, but none was taken.

So I took the opportunity to paraphrase the text. It's below after the break.

Question is, what do I do with it?

  1. Edit the original, deleted answer and post this paraphrase-ment into it, then vote to undelete it?

  2. Post my own answer with this text in it?

  3. Write a completely different answer with completely other tips.

  4. Scrap it and run.

The article "Integrating Kittens with Cats" (W.V. Cats) provides intricate details on the procedure for introducing kittens to adult cats. According to the article, the summarized steps for introduction (backtrack to the prior step if there is an issue) include:

  1. Keeping the new kitten / cat separate from the household for multiple days.

  2. Providing scents from each feline involved to each other; transmitted through use of cloths. This begins the process of a safe introduction.

  3. Non-interactive transference of each cat to the other territory to continue scent familiarization.

  4. Visually introducing the cats for a few minutes, without physical interaction.

  5. Feeding or rewarding the cats near the territory borders.

  6. Introducing the cats physically under intense supervision.

    • brief visitation
    • continue rewarding with treats
    • separate if fear or hostility is apparent
  7. Introducing the cats for longer visitations

    • multiple hours
    • constant supervision
  8. Allow unhindered interaction, but separate when unsupervised

  9. Allow unhindered, unsupervised interaction

    • allow only when kitten has reached 16 weeks old
    • allow when all other steps are acceptable

It is recommended to visit the source article for detailed elaboration on each step.

  • 1
    The title should probably ask about a plagerised answer not question...
    – user9
    Commented Oct 21, 2013 at 21:23

2 Answers 2


You've covered the basis of attribution fine and paraphrased the text, so there's nothing technically wrong with the answer you put together from the original. I'm sure this will not be the last question where nobody has more first-hand experience to share, and it looks pretty accurate. Remember, we're going to public beta soon which means that there's plenty of opportunity for someone with more experience on the topic to share what they know.

I think the answer is fine to leave, and you did the best you could given what was there. Arguably the absence of an answer might make the prospect of providing a new one more enticing to someone once the site opens, but we've already spent such an inordinate amount of time on this to begin with. I'd hate to see nothing constructive come out of it.

Also goes without saying, but, it's great that you care so much about it. You've done all you can do :)

  • Edit it into the old answer and undelete since it was built on the original, or post it as a different answer?
    – JoshDM
    Commented Oct 21, 2013 at 3:35
  • @JoshDM The one you posted and deleted seems fine to just restore - I was about to do that for you, but I wasn't 100% positive that was the copy you planned on going with.
    – user105
    Commented Oct 21, 2013 at 3:36
  • Done. Burma shave.
    – JoshDM
    Commented Oct 21, 2013 at 3:38

I would much rather see original text quoted in the answer than have it "paraphrased" the way it was done here. This is not really paraphrasing since the original authors structure retained and just some words chosen from a thesaurus and substituted. Beyond that I think the answer is good and even better if quoted directly.


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .