Talk:Cattle/Popular culture
| Workgroup category or categories | No categories listed [Editors asked to check categories] |
| Article status | Developing article: beyond a stub, but incomplete |
| Underlinked article? | Yes |
| Basic cleanup done? | Yes |
| Checklist last edited by | Derek Harkness 09:55, 11 June 2007 (CDT) |
To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.
http://www.aurochs.org/cows/famous/
Cows, Cows AND Bulls, Or Bovine in popular culture?
What say you? Stephen Ewen 19:57, 31 May 2007 (CDT)
Actually, I think it's cows, cattle and bulls. Bulls are only used for breeding and breaking bones at rodeos. Greg Woodhouse 08:47, 1 June 2007 (CDT)
- What about Ferdinand the Bull? I remember that being an animated story.--Robert W King 09:18, 1 June 2007 (CDT)
Bulls should be a separate article, I think. The biological creatures may be the same species, but the bull in poular culture is an entirely different animal than the cow in popular culture.Nancy Sculerati 09:31, 1 June 2007 (CDT)
- Having studied this issue out last night, I need to agree cows and bulls need to be separate, even for practical reasons of length. Stephen Ewen 14:51, 1 June 2007 (CDT)
Category
I've left the category blank while checklisting this as I have absolutly no idea where it should be. Derek Harkness 09:55, 11 June 2007 (CDT)
Another subpage type?
I have mixed feelings about this sort ("in popular culture") of page, which Wikipedia is so full of. On the one hand, they're very entertaining, and interesting in about the same way that the scads of junk information on the Internet is interesting. No doubt this sort of page is also useful to certain researchers, as well.
What the page tends to become, however, is not an extended piece of prose about "X in popular culture," but instead a list of references in popular culture. (Atom Heart Mother for christ's sake. I remember that album cover.) Indeed, it really, one might say, ruins the page if it is made into a narrative, because narratives are necessarily selective, and part of the fun is making the list of pop culture references exhaustive.
Well, why don't we just make a new subpage type: Pop Culture. So this page would live at Cow/Pop Culture. In the instructions for this type of page, we define exactly how this sort of page should be constructed, what pop culture reference types to list, what information to give about them, etc.
This is something I can get behind, I think. It relegates the information to a subpage, but then allows people interested in collecting this sort of information full rein to collect the trivial, silly, etc.
Cf. the lists constructed now on Butler. --Larry Sanger 11:35, 12 August 2007 (CDT)