Talk:Dog meat
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about personal opinions about dog meat. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about personal opinions about dog meat at the Reference desk. |
To-do list for Dog meat:
|
A summary of this article appears in Dog. |
|
||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dog meat. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20120106181038/http://www.demotix.com:80/news/302632/tribal-naga-dog-meat-delicacy to http://www.demotix.com/news/302632/tribal-naga-dog-meat-delicacy
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
- 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dog meat. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071010154634/http://www.jai.or.id/jurnal/2004/sv/06gw_sv04.pdf to http://www.jai.or.id/jurnal/2004/sv/06gw_sv04.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
- 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Requested move 22 June 2016
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: no consensus to move. SSTflyer 10:26, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Dog meat → Dog as food – After recent discussion at Duck as food, several pages have been moved from X (food) to X as food. I suggest that for consistency, we also move this article to Dog as food. Comments welcome. DrChrissy (talk) 21:49, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
- I re-formatted this so it'll list as an official RM. -- Tavix (talk) 22:01, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
- Support, "Dog meat" seems to refer to dog food (i.e. what dogs eat). "Dog as food" spells it out, in mondo-Wikipedia style, for the semi-vegetarians (the misnomer of all misnomers). Randy Kryn 23:30, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose: "dog as food" is nonsensical and uncommon nomenclature for subject. Just because there's other crap doesn't mean this should be dragged along with it. There is next to zero coverage for "duck as food", "dog as food" etc; they don't even pass the Google Test. "Dog meat" is the commonly used and accepted name for this and article should reflect that. -- dsprc [talk] 00:13, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Before the recent moves, by my count we had 10 articles titled "Foo meat" and and 12 on "Foo as food"; and except for "chicken as food", the "as food" article were exclusively seafoods (see {{Meat}} and {{Seafood}} for articles). The "as food" construction is really awkward, but I can see some cases where it is appropriate when subjects besides meat are mentioned (as in the chicken article which touches on rendered fat). This article really seems to be specifically about dog flesh, so keep at the present title. Plantdrew (talk) 05:33, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- Support: per WP:CONSISTENCY, also WP:PRECISE; just putting 'meat' after a name doesn't really work very well. If we don't have a specific word for a type of meat (for example we have beef) then 'as meat' seems much more sensible. Additionally its not just the meat part of the dog that can be eaten, organs can also be eaten so the new title slightly improves the scope of the article. Ebonelm (talk) 12:32, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- The word for dog meat in English is dog meat. -- dsprc [talk] 17:52, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- Support: per WP:CONSISTENCY, also WP:PRECISE; there is precedent for this and it serves sprit of NPOV to keep things as neutral as possible. It makes sense to change this rather than duckmeat, cowmeat, chickenmeat, etc.?Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 18:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- How is the commonly accepted and used nomenclature "dog meat" not neutral? -- dsprc [talk] 18:20, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- Melonbarmonster2 cites NPOV while having a long, long history of trying to whitewash this article. I believe he wishes "dog as food" because it sounds kinder. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:20, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose - While I typically support WP:CONSISTENCY, it only makes sense to keep the page as "Dog meat" as per WP:COMMONNAME. Meatsgains (talk) 21:27, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- I request this user's comment is ignored - the username indicates they clearly have a COI in retaining the original name (Joke!) DrChrissy (talk) 21:32, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose COMMONNAME supersedes consistency, especially in this case. Visitors expect to see the title as "dog meat". Few will arrive at the article and think "Say, that is not right. The title is not consistent with Chicken as food." because most will not have visited other consistent articles. Give visitors what they expect. Plus "dog meat" is not just somewhat common, it is extremely so. Almost every single book uses "dog meat". Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- Comment, for people citing WP:CONSISTENCY, please look at the source code of {{Meat}}. "Foo as food" is nowhere near a consistently used title. We have articles on alligator meat, kangaroo meat, turkey meat, cat meat, elephant meat, goat meat, horse meat, crab meat and whale meat as well as this one. There isn't a single article on meat from a mammal that uses the "as food" title (yes, there are several articles on mammal meats that have a specialized term: beef, veal, mutton, pork). Plantdrew (talk)
- Good point. And with one of the exceptions Chicken as food, that is not a bad title because so much of the animal that is not actually meat is used as food. With dog, the meat is eaten and not much else. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:48, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, it is a good point. It also further illustrates the inconsistency we have which was my motivation for starting this discussion. DrChrissy (talk) 16:38, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
- Good point. And with one of the exceptions Chicken as food, that is not a bad title because so much of the animal that is not actually meat is used as food. With dog, the meat is eaten and not much else. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:48, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose - the consistency argument doesn't hold water: horse meat, whale meat, etc. X meat is the more common form when a meat doesn't go by another specified name (e.g. beef or pork).—Godsy(TALKCONT) 21:28, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
- Support - This question arises with respect to dogs because dogs can both eat meat and be eaten as meat. If someone makes a threat along the lines of "You're dog meat", they are presumably indicating that they want to feed you to dogs. There can be a nice disambiguation page to sort out the various meanings. —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 01:04, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- So put wikt: in the hat or external links with other sister projects. -- dsprc [talk] 10:15, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Strong oppose – "Dog as food" is a totally artificial construct; Wikipedia is not in the business of inventing fancy, fashionable or politically correct names, the encyclopedia must reflect real-world use. Dog meat is meat. So is horse meat, lion meat and ostrich meat, irrespective of any editor's personal tastes or repulsiveness. — JFG talk 10:47, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- Trendspotting: I suggest moving Anthropophagy → Human as food — JFG talk 10:55, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Support dog meat Peckerwoods (talk) 12:57, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dog meat. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20110811070002/http://articles.cnn.com/2010-03-09/world/china.animals_1_dog-meat-cats-and-dogs-number-of-pet-owners?_s=PM:WORLD to http://articles.cnn.com/2010-03-09/world/china.animals_1_dog-meat-cats-and-dogs-number-of-pet-owners?_s=PM:WORLD
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
- 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:23, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
United States of America section
Could someone please have a look? United States of America --> United States may be best. It used to start with how "dog" means sausage, and now start with "unfortunately". Both not so good. Shouldn't it start with legality, history of eating it in the US, etc.? I'll leave this to others because I haven't been in touch with this article for some time and I cannot access that NYT piece. Cheers. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:06, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
- The content was POV, non-encyclopaedic, but worse still, completely unrelated to the source. DrChrissy (talk) 20:36, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you, DrChrissy. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:59, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
- B-Class Food and drink articles
- Mid-importance Food and drink articles
- WikiProject Food and drink articles
- B-Class Animal rights articles
- Low-importance Animal rights articles
- WikiProject Animal rights articles
- B-Class Dogs articles
- High-importance Dogs articles
- WikiProject Dogs articles
- B-Class Korea-related articles
- Mid-importance Korea-related articles
- WikiProject Korea articles
- WikiProject Korea cuisine working group
- Unassessed Vietnam articles
- Unknown-importance Vietnam articles
- All WikiProject Vietnam pages
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- Wikipedia pages with to-do lists