Talk:Cow (disambiguation)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Page move
Is it okay to move this article to Cow (disambiguation) and then make Cow re-direct to Cattle?? Any objections?? Georgia guy 01:47, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
-
- I counter-object. There are a huge number of links to Cow, and I don't see any of them that are not about cattle. This is one of the clearest examples I have ever seen of one primary meaning and other secondary meanings. (If there were a separate article for female cattle, it would be less clear.) Georgia guy's suggestion is correct. — Pekinensis 17:12, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- Yeah, I can't imagine most people aren't thinking of cattle when they type in Cow. I was pretty surprised to see a disambiguation page pop up here. Someone should fix this. Pulsemeat
-
- This page lists many of the acronym expansions that are also on the COW article. Something better should probably be done to avoid the partial duplication and de-synced content. Bovineone 01:36, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- OK, I'll redirect to Cattle.--Commander Keane 18:38, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- I object to the redirect. "Cow" is singular, while "Cattle" is plural. Mikesc86 01:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- Sure, but "cattle" doesn't have a gender-neutral singular form; information on the species has to be in a "Cattle" article. Calling the article "Cow" is misleading, but most people searching for "cow" will want the "Cattle" article. Powers 01:59, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- It's crazy isn't it? Such an important animal in human history and there's no general term for them! Beef is a possibility, but it's even more ambiguous than cow -- and I've only ever really heard it used in the plural: beeves. Ewlyahoocom 02:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- Scroll down about two-thirds here: [1] =) Powers 12:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- Shall I request the move to Bullamacow, or just be bold and do it? Ewlyahoocom 13:33, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- Scroll down about two-thirds here: [1] =) Powers 12:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- It's crazy isn't it? Such an important animal in human history and there's no general term for them! Beef is a possibility, but it's even more ambiguous than cow -- and I've only ever really heard it used in the plural: beeves. Ewlyahoocom 02:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- Sure, but "cattle" doesn't have a gender-neutral singular form; information on the species has to be in a "Cattle" article. Calling the article "Cow" is misleading, but most people searching for "cow" will want the "Cattle" article. Powers 01:59, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Acronyms
Those acronyms did come from acronym finder, so it's sensable that that link was added, at least in the context of a source.
[edit] Got milk?
Why does the cow page say 'Got milk!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!' on it? This is vandalism and really isn't very informative.
