Talk:Cattle/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Cattle population: the European Union is not a country!

I would appreciate if the figures for the cattle population in the European Union were replaced by the figures for the cattle population in separate European countries. The European Union is not a country or a state and certainly not a nation. There is no such thing as a "European" culture, language or people. The European Union can in no way be compared to e.g. the United States of America. There is also no "social dumping" of cheap workers in the USA, that is people actually working in a certain state but being paid according to the cheaper wages in another state! You cannot have a vehicle with license plates from a certain US state, when this vehicle is used exclusively in other US states. Frankly the European Union is a monstrosity!Amand Keultjes (talk) 22:33, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

I do not know which section you are referring to exactly, but if it is the table, the column is headed "region", not "country". Having said that I would also like to see it listed for separate countries because if the UK, France or others begin to leave the EU, this will make our articles inaccurate. This applies to many other articles and so perhaps needs to be also raised at a broader talk page. DrChrissy ^(talk) 23:18, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cattle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090420140454/http://www.petermaas.nl:80/extinct/speciesinfo/aurochs.htm to http://www.petermaas.nl/extinct/speciesinfo/aurochs.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:38, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 November 2016

Only female cattle are cows, males are called bulls. Ajking0465 (talk) 22:02, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

The note in the article already explains that. RudolfRed (talk) 22:41, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 January 2017

word average misspelt in environmental impact section as overage 81.134.46.190 (talk) 16:19, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Not done: Its not misspelled, it is a different word "Overage" meaning excess or surplus. regards, DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 16:41, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2017

Reference number 141 cites a source that does not list the author and includes data of an unknown source. 216.229.136.70 (talk) 04:00, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  05:55, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 April 2017

From as few as 80 progenitors domesticated in southeast Turkey about 10,500 years ago,[1] according to an estimate from 2011, there are 1.4 billion cattle in the world.[2]

TO

10,500 years ago, Cattle were domesticated from as few as 80 progenitors in southeast Turkey[1]. According to an estimate from 2011, there are 1.4 billion cattle in the world.[2] Knoklet (talk) 17:56, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Done. Dbfirs 20:23, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Citation for the fact that bulls don't hate the colour red

It says that bulls don't hate the colour red but hate movement of the cape but it still has no citation linked to it. Here's the citation: http://www.livescience.com/33700-bulls-charge-red.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.95.152.100 (talk) 23:48, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Important questions

If the cow originated from the Aurochs is not it logical for the cow to be considered a subspecies of the aurochs, which means "Subspecies: Bos primigenius taurus".

This article is named cattle, the only article I have seen that is in plural, why should this be a exception?

• About to revert the edits adding Auroch, as that is the ancestor but not the current breed. Cattle is the WP:COMMONNAME, and refers to the domesticated animal, not the wild ancestor. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 18:47, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
  • As for singular or plural, one female bovine is a "cow", one male bovine is a "bull" or "steer". Two or more bovine are cattle. You can technically have "one head of cattle", although that isn't commonly used. Cattle refers to both genders, cow does not, even if some people mistakenly use the word that way. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 18:51, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Cattle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080401084434/http://www.experiencefestival.com/a/Cattle_-_Terminology/id/1287270 to http://www.experiencefestival.com/a/Cattle_-_Terminology/id/1287270
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lexile.com/PowerV/Pioneer%20Girl%20Growng%20Up%20on%20the%20Prairie.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100707061932/http://beef.unl.edu/FAQ/200509030.shtml to http://beef.unl.edu/FAQ/200509030.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121116045317/http://www.nt.gov.au/d/Content/File/p/Anim_Dis/747.pdf to http://www.nt.gov.au/d/Content/File/p/Anim_Dis/747.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120617004300/http://usda01.library.cornell.edu/usda/current/Catt/Catt-01-27-2012.pdf to http://usda01.library.cornell.edu/usda/current/Catt/Catt-01-27-2012.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120502130352/http://dda.delaware.gov/nutrients/Draft_TechStandards/CAFO_BMPassessment.pdf to http://dda.delaware.gov/nutrients/Draft_TechStandards/CAFO_BMPassessment.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131115074052/http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/planning/priorities/cwacafo.html to http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/planning/priorities/cwacafo.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.buiatrics.com/showpage.php?p=eng_wab
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.buiatrics.com/showpage.php?p=eng_list
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071019051455/http://www.tbalert.org.uk/news_press/documents/XDRTBarticle.pdf to http://www.tbalert.org.uk/news_press/documents/XDRTBarticle.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131015040055/http://www.nepad-caadp.net/pdf/A0586e03.pdf to http://www.nepad-caadp.net/pdf/A0586e03.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:02, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cattle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150518073505/https://www.uvm.edu/extension/agriculture/faccp/files/aglabor_bilingual/milk_quality_posters.pdf to https://www.uvm.edu/extension/agriculture/faccp/files/aglabor_bilingual/milk_quality_posters.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070221103824/http://www6.plala.or.jp/awia/AizuGlossary.html to http://www6.plala.or.jp/awia/AizuGlossary.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070202174629/http://www.ultimateungulate.com/ to http://www.ultimateungulate.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:02, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

about age

In the article a new section can be added for the age of cow . It will tell the average age , highest age and the ages of cows of several breeds — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wholecube (talk • contribs) 14:14, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2017

i need to edit when i see mistakes. Megancheny (talk) 19:39, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. If there is an error, please specify what it is and what the correction should be. RudolfRed (talk) 20:15, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cattle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131017230339/http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/waste_mgt/natlcenter/sanantonio/balvanz.pdf to http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/waste_mgt/natlcenter/sanantonio/balvanz.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:46, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Bos longifrons

There's currently a discussion on the Benty Grange helmet talk page, about the type of horn that was used in the helmet. The 1974 authority on the helmet suggests that the horn from bos longifrons was used, b ut more recent literature says that bos longifrons is no longer recognized as a species. Could anyone who is familiar please weigh in, and suggest what type of species is most likely evoked by a 1974 reference to bos longifrons? Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 22:09, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

cows have six teats that give us and the females cows calf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Konnor7721 (talk • contribs) 18:05, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Incredulous of the population statistics

How did India lose about 90 million cattle over a 4 year period. There's no way these numbers are correct. Such a cow holocaust would be major news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.160.214.34 (talk) 05:52, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps they were imaginary cattle? The figure from four years ago might not have been accurate. If you think that the current statistic is incorrect, please find a WP:Reliable source for a more accurate figure. Dbfirs 06:23, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Origin and Domestication

The information given on domestication of cattle seems to be inaccurate. The intro states "cattle were domesticated (...) in southeast Turkey". But the source given makes no such claim. The source states:

in an area between the Levant, central Anatolia and western Iran(...)

I've changed the information to what is stated in the source. I'd appreciate any input ~ Zirguezi 11:28, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

@Zirguezi: Inserting this much content word for word from another source is a copyright violation, even when it is in a talk page. See WP:COPYVIO. I'm not going to report since it seems you are not aware of this. But instead assume good faith WP:GF, and give you a chance to remove it yourself. dawnleelynn^(talk) 16:52, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi dawnleelynn, thank you for your message. I was unaware of that. I've shortened it the quote now. Can you confirm that it is now acceptable? ~ Zirguezi 17:12, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

@Zirguezi: I believe it now meets the requirement of a brief quotation for use as non-free content as stated in the above copyright violation policy. Happy trails! dawnleelynn^(talk) 18:12, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2019

i am djjrtuvjrugufitodkfivjgjtutufdoditjguvifdtughvseiktugjg8tigtiguhikcvi

fjgnvibmvgjjjjigjifjbivjkghpeldkgjb ugjgldlfkgmbjb fitugitiutj iuh8rjufkyiti9r8g8tut

No comprehensible content. Dbfirs 19:21, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Quotes from the Quran

Long quotes from the Quran that incidentally mention a cow are hardly appropriate to the subject of this article. I've removed them once, but they have been put back. What does anyone else think? Dbfirs 16:40, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

... later ... Thank you to Justlettersandnumbers for removing the long quotes again with a good Wikipedia policy reason. I hope Smatrah‎ doesn't put them back. Dbfirs 17:12, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Agreed, Dbfirs, I've removed them again. While the Qur'an is not trivial, this entire section has become a typical trivia magnet – many of the statements in the "other traditions" section are unsourced, some are completely banal (a journalist who invented a story, so what?), and others are near-nonsense (the Fulani are "the largest cattle-herders"? – I've met many Fulani people, and found them not noticeably larger than anyone else in West Africa). I suggest removing the whole of that sub-section, and reducing the remaining content to a few sentences of running text – the bulk of the material should be covered in the various linked sub-articles. I'd also suggest removing most of the unsourced and entirely US-centred content from Ox (an article that sorely needs attention), and limiting what is included here to material that is immediately and clearly relevant to this article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:34, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers Is that a joke? Finding Fulani people not larger than other people in West Africa? I am pretty sure that they meant the Fulani herd more cattle than any other nomadic cattle herders in the world...LOL good one. dawnleelynn^(talk) 17:56, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

That’s good that you have expanded section of Islamic traditions. Thank you. But there are two mentions of cattle in 2nd chapter of Quran. You have added information of cow slaughtered by Israelites by the command of God to resurrect a person. Please also mention another passage which tells about the worship of calf by Israelites and pardon of God etc. Thank you. Smatrah (talk) 02:09, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Not particularly encyclopedic lead image

I found myself laughing at the lead image. This is not an accurate portrayal of how the vast majoirty of cattle are managed. A more encyclopedic image would show more cattle, fenced, ears tagged, no "cowbell", a more mainstream breed (widely used in industrial agriculture), and the land would be deforested, flat, overgrazed pastureland with soil erosion and no lovely mountainscape panorama. Something like the image from animal husbandry, although this image is also not too suitble since it does not feature a good close up of one animal. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 20:54, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Common name

If the common name for Bos gaurus is gaur, why isn't this species' common name "taur"? Explain Booger-mike (talk) 01:05, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Consumption

Although cattle is used as a main source of food across the globe it is not included in the vegetarian or vegan diets. In other parts of the world certain cultures prohibit the consumption of cattle for moral and religious belief — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonhy101 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Citation needed for the word origin

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=cow — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.40.106.59 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Methane Digester Reference

Under environmental impact, after paragraph 1 suggest mention/reference to Methane Digester technology used to convert methane from dairy cattle dung into electricity offers a good reference for information on this that is not from a digester manufacturer or seller. Hightones (talk) 21:01, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2020

i wish to add edits... Gofhwu124 (talk) 20:32, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. Until you're autoconfirmed, you'll have to be more specific. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 20:50, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

livestock

Adding an etymological section for livestock, as the one here for cattle, would considerably improve the article, where livestock is mentioned as opposed to deer as the life of the deer and the cattle//////// :;;;:;;;::::: --Backinstadiums (talk) 13:16, 12 March 2020 (UTC) !~~!

save the cattle

Evolution

Would it be possible to add an evolution section on this page as I cannot see any section related to the evolution of cows. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OneSixtyNine (talk • contribs) 15:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2020

Remove "Medical science stresses the importance of the cow for her milk, her urine as well as her excreta in our day-to-day life." Kaalaam (talk) 05:00, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Why should I remove a sentence that is cited to a scientific journal based on the claims of an op-ed...?? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 05:09, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

 Requesting Again: I am requesting wikipedia to remove the sentence as it has no citations in a scientific journal else provide a direct reference to this. It's a false claim in name of medical science. How can wikipedia mention a sentence in name of medical science with not a single scientific journal or article as reference? I have cited a scientific journal where this claim has been falsified . Kaalaam (talk) 01:11, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done (along with the rest of the paragraph to boot), and thanks for being persistent about it. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 03:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Sapi P.O

Sapi PO (Peranakan Ongole) Adalah Sapi Persilangan Antara Sapi Ongole dan Sapi Jawa Akhmad Geka (talk) 02:11, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Please write down in English. Thank you. Rasnaboy (talk) 05:30, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

" cattle needs to be safe "

2001:5B0:245A:45E8:B967:9840:DFCC:F989 (talk) 00:41, 20 November 2020 (UTC) when was the last time you see a cattle will think about the cattle and the bos veasr /// nick name for contery ///// make the cattle live dont kill the cattle keep the cattle— life will kill you−

cattle ←

bon verse is a nick name for contery where the cattle live§ love the cattle because my mom will kill you this is my gmail to text me −−−−−bradley.myers@stu.henry.kyschools.us here text me or your deid — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:245A:45E8:B967:9840:DFCC:F989 (talk) 00:45, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

I love cows — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.121.190 (talk) 20:02, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

I LOVE COWS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.121.190 (talk) 20:04, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Interbreeding

It is my understanding that only subspecies may interbreed and produce viable young. That's why the common dog (Canis lupus familiaris) is considered a subspecies with the North American gray wolf (Canis lupus lupus.) They produce "wolf dogs."

First the article mentions inter-species breeding, then mentions hybrids between cattle and zebu, having previously called them subspecies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18C:8700:B830:1D0A:48FB:156A:AF36 (talk) 06:27, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Is the Animal Welfare Concerns section really neccesary?

This is the only species page that has an Animal Welfare Concerns section. Perhaps it should be moved to the Animal Welfare Concerns section on the Slaughterhouse page. --Countryboy603 (talk) 06:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Normal dry period of cows

Under section 11.2 Economy -> dairy

"They will continue to produce milk until three weeks before birth." Three weeks is very short, more common is eight weeks.

Also the source 130 in the article doesn't say a thing about the dry period.

Frans Ver (talk) 11:48, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2021

At the part in the introduction paragraphs where it is talking about how cows play a big part of a religion in india I was wondering if you could put a hyperlink word that redirects you to the wikipedia page for hinduism or something like that in case anyone is interested or something. Dogloverman70465 (talk) 00:51, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. There is already a link to Cattle_in_religion_and_mythology, which covers Hinduism and other religions. If there is something else, please state it specifically. RudolfRed (talk) 02:06, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Confusing Taxonomy

I'm confused. This article claims that Aurochs are a subspecies of cattle, but the page for Aurochs says that they are their own species. 69.14.212.111 (talk) 04:38, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

discrepancy between source and article

In the "Hearing" section of the Senses "Part", it is said that cattle " have a lowest threshold of −21 db (re 20 μN/m−2)" but the cited source (Heffner & Heffner, doi : 10.1037/0735-7044.97.2.299 ) says -11 db (pages 299 and 303). So maybe somebody who can edit semi-protected articles could take a look at this discrepancy Smatu (talk) 14:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

After a few more edits, you should be able to fix that. Montanabw^(talk) 19:12, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

"…they obtain almost 50% of their information visually"?

Currently in section 7.1 "Vision" this article states prominently, "Vision is the dominant sense in cattle and they obtain almost 50% of their information visually." This struck me as vague to a fault, so I decided to check out the source. The claim comes from Adamczyk et al. (2015), pg. 567 who in turn cite Phillips (2002), pg. 49 for this. In defense of the claim that cattle get approximately 50% of their total sensory information from vision, Phillips says only that "aspects of visual information processing can be estimated by optometric measurements…measuring neural activity…or investigating the behavior of the animal psychophysically." Without more detailed information, it seems hard for anyone reading Phillips, let alone this article, to understand what's actually being said here in rigorous terms—I would want to see these kinds of measurements or other investigations in detail before I would feel like I could draw any solid conclusions. Phillips does go on to give detailed and concrete information about bovine senses but I don't see how any of it adds up to "50% of information from here, 25% from there, etc." or something like that.

Of course, it's maybe not really our place to say what claims by experts are reasonable or not—I suppose you could say that since reliable sources say this, all we should do is repeat it and leave it at that. At the same time, it's not clear to me how these authors are even quantifying sensory information in such a grand and sweeping fashion from the data they have, and I feel like readers of this article deserve to understand that before reading an attempt to say what proportion of sensory information comes from what source in cattle in quantitative terms overall. If that can't be done, my instinct would be to remove this claim on the basis of its vagueness, despite its presence in good sources. Does that seem reasonable? Mesocarp (talk) 03:13, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

"Draft:Common cattle" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Draft:Common cattle. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 26#Draft:Common cattle until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:03, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Global greenhouse emissions

The article says 10% of global greenhouse emissions. I think this should be human activity related emissions. I don't think this includes "natural" sources such as geological events, termites, etc. It also isn't clear which types of emissions (CO2, methane, etc.) by weight, volume, or temperature impact. 73.110.102.41 (talk) 20:52, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Does "cows" include bulls?

Taxonomy aside, it is an article about cows, but not bulls, apparently. ~ cygnis insignis 06:02, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

@Cygnis insignis: the terms "cows" and "bulls" denote the females and males of a whole range of mammals, including seals, camels and even whales. This page is about cattle of the Bos taurus species rather than cows of other genera. --89.206.112.10 (talk) 07:00, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Cow is a redirect. And as usual, a redirect often points to the most frequent use of the word. When someone in an English-speaking country hears "cow", they usually think of a bovine (non-specific male or female, just bovine thing)... not some other female non-bovine mammal. And as is typical in Wikipedia, there is a hatnote when you arrive from Cow to Cattle which says "Cow" and "Cows" redirect here. For other uses, see Cattle (disambiguation) and Cow (disambiguation). Platonk (talk) 07:05, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Do you mean to say that because people unfamiliar with the subject refer to all cattle as cows, bulls should be excluded from the article on cattle?--89.206.112.10 (talk) 07:11, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

People do indeed see a 'cattle' and say "Oh, it's a cow!" whether or not it's a cow or bull. Yes, the word 'cow' encompasses both sexes of cattle. (pausing while I go get the dictionary on the shelf) Ah, I see that definition #3 is tagged as an Americanism definition for 'cow': "a domestic bovine animal, whether a steer, bull, cow, or calf". Platonk (talk) 07:27, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! So this article is about cows and bulls of all domestic bovine cattle after all. Also, depending on what dictionary you're using, definition #3 may very well be the author's refined ironic reference owing to his perception of American english as lacking sophistication.--89.206.112.10 (talk) 07:58, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

It is unusual to have one gender as a link out from an article on an animal, how that emerged is likely to be a consequence of a lack of scope when allying taxonomy to a complex of common terms for domestic breeds. Saying that some cattle are cows is likely to be correct, by a passerby, most economic value is in the females and male births have a different, abbreviated, destiny. ~ cygnis insignis 10:21, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

@89.206.112.10: My offer of what was in my dictionary was to help the discussion by showing a definition of "cow" that could have explained how the article and redirects got to where they got... not to give you fodder to repeatedly insult Americans, American English, the dictionary publishers, and then attack and insult me [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]. Since it's a college-level dictionary for American English it is highly unlikely that the dictionary editor was making any derogatory or ironic comments about some alleged American 'superficiality' or 'lack of sophistication' [8].

Reproduced from the dictionary, including the markups:

cow¹
     * 3 [West] a domestic bovine animal, whether a steer, bull, cow, or calf: usually used in pl. (page 320)

* = Americanism (footnote page 321)

Americanism
     2 a word, phrase, or usage originating in or peculiar to American English (page 44)

— Definitions, Webster's New World Dictionary of American English, Third College Edition (1988)

I wasn't presenting any argument for or against the use of the word 'cow', the slant of the article, or excuses for any redirects. Continue the discussion about the Cattle article, but keep your comments civil — and I recommend you strike your extant uncivil comments. Platonk (talk) 19:36, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

@Platonk: Please consider imagining the following template to be displayed above every comment ever written:

Life is fun and I wish you some as well. Only Karens waste their time on Earth indulging in victimhood.--89.206.112.10 (talk) 06:53, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Steer (cow) redirects here and there isn't any other "steer" redirect with a different disambiguator. Plantdrew (talk) 21:02, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Edit request

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Please add the following template to the article:--89.206.112.16 (talk) 17:06, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

marked as answered, discussion is ongoing. ~ cygnis insignis 10:24, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

@Cygnis insignis: Unfortunately, the discussion isn't ongoing, but hasn't even started yet. May I please ask you to place the template in the actual article, so a honest discussion can begin about whether both taurine and indicine cattle should be regarded as cattle?

The whole "cows vs. cattle" issue has no bearing on the above split proposal. --89.206.112.10 (talk) 10:47, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done I added the template. No opinion on the split, no objections if the template is removed. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:50, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose split. We already have a page on taurine cattle. It may be that some some content should be moved there from here, as discussed above. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:11, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose per Justlettersandnumbers, we already have the proposed split page but that does not preclude the transfer of content between pages. Cavalryman (talk) 12:07, 16 December 2021 (UTC).
• Oppose further split per above. The current articles are fine, though some information could be transferred between them to tighten up the article scope. Rreagan007 (talk) 20:17, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. 162 etc. (talk) 22:08, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

What's this page supposed to be about?

The article starts "Cattle, taurine cattle, Eurasian cattle, or European cattle (Bos taurus or Bos primigenius taurus) ...". If that is supposed to be the topic of of this article then presumably it should be moved to a title such as Taurine cattle (where there's already a page) or European cattle (redirects here, not to that page), and a new page written about cattle in general. Indicine cattle are just as much "cattle" as taurine cattle; if this is meant to be a top-level page about cattle (as used in modern English, i.e. not including smaller livestock) we should make that clear from the start and throughout the article. Thoughts? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:04, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Interesting. My eyeballs skipped right over those 'other names'. But now that you've highlighted it, they look oddly placed and the lead is quite technical (for such a simple concept). I would support simplifying it and moving the technical stuff later down the page, per WP:TECHNICAL, WP:EXPLAINLEAD. Platonk (talk) 18:43, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

I strongly support the idea of abiding by the hierarchy on wikispecies and in the wikipedia article on the genus which state that

• domestic cattle Bos taurus is a species in the cattle genus.
• wild cattle Bos primigenius is also a species in the cattle genus.
• the domestic cattle species Bos taurus has two subspecies:

• Bos taurus indicus = Indicine cattle = zebu = humped domestic cattle
• Bos taurus taurus = Taurine cattle = European cattle = humpless domestic cattle

• the wild cattle species Bos primigenius has three subspecies, all of which are extinct:

• Bos primigenius africanus = African aurochs
• Bos primigenius namadicus = Indian aurochs = ancestor of domesticated Bos taurus indicus
• Bos primigenius primigenius = Eurasian aurochs = ancestor of domesticated Bos taurus taurus

Therefore, this article should be about the Bos taurus species, either including both the Taurine and the Indicene subspecies or include neither of them and refer to each subspecies' separate article instead. --89.206.112.10 (talk) 10:28, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

• Comment, I think this article should be about all of the domestic cattle sub-species, including both listed here and as well as Bos taurus africanus etc. I suspect Taurine cattle will need to be expanded. If that is most easily achieved by moving this article to Taurine cattle and starting “cattle” afresh then let’s not make hard work for ourselves. On a side note, I also think Zebu should be moved to Indicine cattle, I seriously doubt it is the common name, I come from a country with over 14 million Indicine cattle (and I occasionally read some international agricultural publications), I have never read anywhere or heard anyone call them Zebu. Cavalryman (talk) 22:40, 15 December 2021 (UTC).
• I agree with Cavalryman – this should be the top-level article on cattle in general, covering taurine, indicine and Sanga types with approximately equal weight, with some coverage of taurindicine hybrids and mention of any significant oddities such as inter-species hybrids. It should have a global perspective and focus mainly on characteristics that are common to all cattle throughout the world; material that relates to one or few countries only should be removed or rewritten (the discussion of weights, for example). It may be that some could be moved the taurine cattle page. There is no reason to split this page on the lines suggested below, as we already have articles on the three principal types/subspecies.

IP editor, we don't need to pay any attention to what Wikispecies says about anything – that is user-submitted content and so not a reliable source. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:08, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Platonk, Cavalryman, and Justlettersandnumbers: please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taurine cattle. fiveby(zero) 04:23, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree that this article should be about all domesticated cattle, not just taurine cattle, which has its own article. Zebu are just as much cattle as taurine cattle. Until last year the scope of this article was all domesticated cattle and I'm not sure how it ended up being focused only on taurine cattle. Kaldari (talk) 04:27, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Since the consensus here is unanimous, I've edited the article to re-expand the scope to include all domesticated cattle. Kaldari (talk) 05:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Article scope

The scope of this article is all domesticated cattle, however, it mainly focuses on European (or taurine) cattle and very little on Zebu and Sanga cattle. We should move some of the content of this article over to taurine cattle in order to make this article more balanced and to flesh out the taurine cattle article more. (Note that from August 2021 until recently this article was explicitly rescoped to only taurine cattle by a single editor without discussion. This has been mostly reverted per discussion above, but things are still a bit of a mess due to these changes.) Kaldari (talk) 07:25, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Cattle Taxonomy RFC

Please see the RFC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mammals#RFC: Taxonomy of Cattle and respond there if you have an opinion. Thanks! Kaldari (talk) 19:50, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2022

Change dairy breeds are called cows and non-dairy breeds are called bulls to females of the species are called cows while intact males are called bulls and castrated males are called steers. 2601:180:301:E9D:548C:905B:5E53:B9DB (talk) 00:23, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

 Done Vandalism reverted. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:41, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Zoroastrian Cleaning

Probably need a newer source than this for such an important topic, but apparently among Zoroastrians cow's urine went from being a preventative/cure against leprosy to being a common daily ablution to avoid disease and evil spirits until the early 20th century. In lieu of cow's urine, apparently goat or human urine was used as a less effective substitute. — LlywelynII 09:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Vagueness

'dominance-associated aggressiveness does not correlate with rank position, but is closely related to rank distance between individuals.'

This is unclear. How is it related? Does it increase or decrease with rank distance? 79.100.144.23 (talk) 22:43, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2022

Cows are very important animals they should not get eaten! 72.2.158.134 (talk) 16:46, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Thewsomeguy (talk) 18:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Taxonomy

This article should be updated to reflect the newer taxonomy agreed to at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mammals/Archive 13#RFC: Taxonomy of Cattle, namely:

• Bos taurus = taurine cattle (European cattle)
• Bos indicus = zebu (Indicine cattle)
• Bos primigenius = aurochs, the undomesticated ancestor
• subgenus Bos = cattle (not to be confused with the genus Bos)

Kaldari (talk) 19:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Terminology

Hello @Needforspeed888 and @Justlettersandnumbers: "those who know no better" are exactly the right audience for an encyclopedia. This is appropriately discussed at Cattle § Singular terminology issue. The question is whether it is appropriate to quickly mention in the lead. Since we already mention the professional terminology I think this should also be there. Invasive Spices (talk) 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Erm, no, ((u|Invasive Spices}}, our job is to present material that is accurate and verifiable, not information on incorrect terminology used by those who do not have the benefit of adequate education (of which regrettably the world has far too many). But if you can find an impeccable source that affirms that bulls are commonly referred to as "cows", then I suppose – (yawn!) – you'd better go ahead and add it, as long as you make it abundantly clear that it is incorrect to do so. And no, the other terminology shouldn't be in the lead either. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:29, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

I think you should read ab. Invasive Spices (talk) 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Greenhouse gas emissions???

Greenhouse gases from cattle are not from fossil carbon so they don't add to the greenhouse effect. That pro-oil-propaganda should not be on this page. 2A02:AA1:1621:47D1:98BE:77FF:FEE4:ACBC (talk) 13:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Methane produced by cows is a greenhouse gas - not all global warming comes from burning fossil fuels. JezGrove (talk) 13:45, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

"Taurus cattle" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Taurus cattle and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 2 § Taurus cattle until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. TNstingray (talk) 22:57, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Clean up / reordering

I have made a series of edits in an attempt to resolve the maintainance template flagging this article for clean up due to messy text layout and placement of media. TatjanaClimate (talk) 13:23, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2023

Please add [citation needed] tag for the section about pet cow where it is suggested that farmers tend to believe that pet cattle must "earn their keep". The latter half of the paragraph is suspiciously devoid of sources. Puddlebrigade (talk) 17:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Done and then some. I removed the extra junk while I was there. First of all, feeding one cow is the same price whether or not they have other "pets" or livestock, so it was misleading. And while I have seen "pet" cows and other animals, I agree it needs a citation. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 18:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2023

In the Terminology section, please add the tag to each bullet point sentence for which a source is not clear. If there is any sky-is-blue argument to the contrary — I as a retired academic, former decade-long logging WP editor, and former cattle farmer will go on record stating that I contest them all. (This is said in simplicity; in actual fact I can see several errors in various parts of several bullets, some sourced but many unsourced—but there are too many issues to attempt to catalog and enumerate them.) 2601:246:C200:4619:926:F7C2:6D6B:7EC3 (talk) 23:49, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2023

For the article as a whole, lift the protections, and use range blocks or other tools to protect against vandalism. There simply is not time enough in life to have to describe edits that can be done in half the time of the describing, and this is not a political contentious subject like the article on the invasion of the Ukraine. Lift the restrictions; find another way to safeguard this simple article. 2601:246:C200:4619:926:F7C2:6D6B:7EC3 (talk) 23:49, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protection only means you need to log in to an account to edit here. If you are interested in editing the article substantially, you can create one. KoA (talk) 15:57, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Recognition of climate change impacts on animal welfare

@Justlettersandnumbers: I did not remember to watchlist this page, and so was really disappointed to discover just now that you chose to completely revert the excerpts I added from effects of climate change on livestock with no prior discussion or warning. Further, I found your edit reason really confusing: thanks, but too much detail for this top-level article, and totally fails to address the elephant in the room – the effects of cattle on climate change.

If there was too much detail, then surely this could have been addressed by making the excerpts quote fewer paragraphs, rather than remove them entirely? Further, this article already has a very sizeable "Environmental impact" section, which devotes three paragraphs and a very clear graph to "the effects of cattle on climate change". That exact elephant in the room had already been addressed, seemingly adequately; the subject of animal welfare or even livestock productivity in the context of climate change had not been addressed at all until I added those excerpts - and now that you have removed them, they are still not addressed at all.

Surely, we can simultaneously acknowledge that cattle have a disproportionate impact on climate change and that they are starting to suffer from it, and will only experience more suffering the more it progresses? Or indeed, that the very business of rearing cattle for profit is not simply a large contributor to climate change, but also that it will become more difficult and less profitable as that very climate change gets more extensive? I don't think these points are in any contradiction with each other. On the contrary, they reinforce each other.

We can discuss the appropriate size of excerpts. I might even forego excerpts entirely in favour of a condensed section written for this article if you would consider that more appropriate. Yet, I consider covering these subjects in some form essential for the completeness of this article. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 13:43, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Well, you may be right, InformationToKnowledge - but I don't think a massive excerpt is the right way to go about that. If you want to add something about that topic here, why don't you just write it in the article in the ordinary way (with attribution for any copied material, of course)? Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:17, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Bold@Justlettersandnumbers 170.173.74.51 (talk) 22:00, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

OK, how about now? InformationToKnowledge (talk) 13:51, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Estimated global cattle populations through history

I believe the addition of the above subject would be very useful to keep track of, especially considering the importance of cattle in the global food supply. The same could be said of other animals like bison, chicken, pigs, and so on. 14.192.208.130 (talk) 12:23, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

"User:Mr. Great Cow" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect User:Mr. Great Cow has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 15 § User:Mr. Great Cow until a consensus is reached. TNstingray (talk) 15:28, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

This page for all forms of domestic cattle?

I understand the rationale behind merging the taurine cattle page with this one, but as English Wikipedia caters to an international audience, i believe that the merged page(s) would've been a useful one if the wikipage for Cattle (currently this one) mentioned the other forms of cattle that originated from disparate domestication events, such as zebu, Indonesian cattle, gayal, and domestic yak, which come from either distinct populations or even entirely different species within Bos.

I therefore argue for the revival of the page Taurine/European cattle to accommodate the information specific to all cattle descended from the European Aurochs (adapted for temperate climates and diseases), and for this page's scope to be expanded to accommodate all forms of domesticated Bos. I leave the option to include other large-bodied domestic bovines, such as the water buffalo, for someone else to decide. Anthropophoca (talk) 06:47, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

If somebody actually put effort into writing a lengthy taurine cattle page, maybe I would consider it, but if it's just a lazy one paragraph stub just for the sake of it then that's a non-starter. If you actually want to split out taurine cattle again, I would suggest starting to work on a sandbox, and writing a substantial article at least 3000 words in length. Then it can be evaluated here. I would oppose the expanding of the scope to all domesticated Bos, because that's probably not what readers are looking for. Hemiauchenia (talk) 07:27, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Young female cattle (heifers), young male cattle (oxen or bullocks), and castrated male cattle (steers) are all colloquially called "cows".

By urbanites, yes. Not so simple among country folk who actually raise cattle, at least in the U.S. And used as a singular, a visitor to the farm/ranch referring to a male as a cow can trigger a response ranging from giggles expressing humor to smirks perceived as derision. Somewhat less so if an obvious steer is called a bull, since at least the m/f distinction is recognized, but a comment along the lines of "That's an ex-bull" would not be surprising. -- The question: why is this (semi-true, misleading) statement in the lede in the first place? Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 15:33, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, doesn't need to be in the lead. It's out now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:51, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Greenhouse gas percentage?

@Chiswckchap As Lula has been in power for a while now so there is less deforestation would it be OR to ignore land use change and simply tick the 4 Climate Trace boxes which mention “cattle”? Also we could link to their methodology, which they explain in detail. Then the lead could just say “more than 4%” which is not likely to change for years.

I mean although the FAO is presumably a more reliable source than Climate Trace a lot has changed since 2015, and I have not yet been able to find the FAO methodology. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

It sounds extremely risky to me, so please, let's not do it. Further, this article is currently going through a GAN review, so it's definitely not a great moment. A third thing: this is not the right article for intricate detail on environmental matters, as it's the top-level article on all things Cattle; we already have Environmental impact of cattle production for exactly that subject. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:22, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Ah thanks I did not notice that article - I will move some detail there and ask on that talk page Chidgk1 (talk) 13:20, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

OK I have put a lot of detail in the main article and the answer seems to be between 4% and 12%. If anyone from the FAO is reading this where are your methodology and error bars please? Chidgk1 (talk) 12:35, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't think you'll get an answer that way, and I do think your own methodology of calculation and inference is extremely close to the WP:OR boundary. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Gayal

According to All the Mammals of the world there are 4 species of cattle: Bos frontalis, Bos domesticus, Bos taurus and Bos indicus. Pls can you change it?

Yes, we can add a note about the species. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Cobbes Farm Museum

One of the images used in this article (and elsewhere) is labelled "Cobbes Farm Museum, England". There is no such place. I suspect the photo was actually taken at Cogges Manor Farm near Oxford, but that's just a guess. Ef80 (talk) 17:45, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Certainly the place. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)