Talk:Pink slime
Latest comment: 13 days ago by Aminomancer in topic Any new information?
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pink slime article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 90 days  |
 | Pink slime has been listed as one of the Agriculture, food and drink good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
The 70 percent claim
editThis article repeatedly claims that 70% of products included pink slime in 2012. I don't know if that's true or not, but the only source given is the ABC news report, which as the rest of the article points out was the subject of a large and fairly successful defamation suit. 128.12.122.106 (talk) 04:34, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- Just replying to bring attention to this question as it appears to have gone unnoticed 2405:6E00:2441:702F:191F:B3F6:B6FB:407 (talk) 09:56, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Lack of information on other countries
editThe article focuses on US issues with the product and lacks views from other places except Europe. In Brazil, for instance, I doubt even half of the population knows about this product, despite having crises in 2014-16 regarding meat additives at several meat processing plants. Anacforcelli (talk) 22:45, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
- I removed the {{Globalize}} template from the article (diff), which stated, "The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject." This was done because Pink slime (also known as lean finely textured beef or LFTB, finely textured beef, or boneless lean beef trimmings or BLBT) is an American invention and product. No evidence has been provided here that it is used in other countries. North America1000 07:56, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
Reverted move
editPink Slime is pejorative and therefore not allowed by common name rules. There is already disambiguation and the pink slime is more commonly used in reference to the media. The title should be changed. 208.77.255.249 (talk) 18:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- This move is not a minor edit and consensus is needed first. such changes without consensus are disruptive. While the industry may be using 'Lean finely textured beef' the press, including the AP in 2022, is still using 'pink slime' to discuss this product. I suggest you move it back or you are likely to be reverted. Dialectric (talk) 18:50, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Aperseghin: I have reverted the move of the article since, based on the discussions linked in the yellow box at the top of the page, it's a potentially controvertial move and would need to be discussed first. If you wish to proceed with this process, please see the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Controversial. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Any new information?
editThe article mostly references sources from 2012, with a few from 2013-2014, but largely stops there. Stylistically, it wavers between present and past tense ("as of 2012"). I wouldn't want to replace all instances of present tense with past tense, since ideally the article will be updated to provide a contemporary view, and then all that would need to be reverted. But I'm not good at finding new sources, so I just wanted to pin this suggestion. Aminomancer (talk) 01:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)