Talk:Red Angus

message: It's been suggested that Red Angus be merged with Angus Cattle. I don't agree with this, because Red Angus have been recognised as a different breed to Angus. However, genetically, the breeds are very similar.
There is also many offical Red Angus websites , which shows more about Red Angus and Black Angus being separate breeds.
Red Angus Australia as opposed to Black Angus. It talks about the 'Red Angus relatives' here.
Please discuss: —Preceding unsigned comment added by CattleGirl (talk • contribs) 
I agree,
The Red Angus and the Black Angus are different breeds.
Yes, they are the same in structure and they have the same Angus name but because of the different colours and genetics they are classified as a different breeds.—Preceding unsigned comment added by  Black Angus Girl (talk • contribs) 
:I also agree and removed it.  Three people who know the business should be more than enough votes to end this discussion.Dukemeiser 05:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: Red and black ARE the same breed. Genetically they are exactly the same, and they carry recessive genes like any other species. Only the US and Australia have separate  books for them. The breed originated in Scotland, and if Scotland considers red and black one breed, why doesn't Wikipedia? 
Politics should not interfere with genetics, yet here still exists a strong marketing efforts to discredit ed coat bovines. http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/the-link-between-climate-change-and-the-food-on-your-plate/Content?oid=3369271
I grew up on a ranch in Argentina that only bred pedigree red Aberdeen Angus cattle. The name was never shortened to "Angus" alone and the red and black were, and still are, one breed. I have found out that here in the US most people (even among cattle breeders) don't know about red Aberdeen Angus. It is my understanding that early in the 20th Century, red cows were not preferred and were not allowed to be registered in the breeds books, even when they were born from pedigree stock.
 
Joining the articles (they are not too long) can also help those who don't know about the subject, learn that red Aberdeen Angus are out there too. The recessive red gene exists in this breed as it does in most others. Also from my experience in Argentina, red cattle are more resilient to heat and certain deceases, like foot and mouth decease, than their black counterpart. Galloway cattle are very close to Aberdeen Angus and both the belted and non-belted have red and black variations. Reds are not considered a separate breed.
If there's no more opposition to the merge, let's merge the two pages. TomasMFC (talk) 21:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page should be merged with Angus Cattle page 

message: The article refers to a non-existent table depicting color. Where is the table, and more importantly, did someone just copy this content? Is this a copyright violation? RPellessier | Talk 14:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, i was going to put this table up but i tried and it didn't work, and i must have forgotten to remove that text. CattleGirl 00:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The table has been uploaded. And it was typed up by me- not a copyright violation. CattleGirl 11:12, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I removed the image table but formatted the contents using a Wiki table. Hope you don't mind. - Fneep 09:25, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for doing that, i would have done it myself, but i couldn't figure out how the tables work! :) CattleGirl 10:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is the table? 

message: It seems a preponderance of this article is dedicated to a (basic, accurate) summary of Mendelian inheritance. Could it simply be summarized that the red color is a recessive phenotype (with a link to the Mendelian article for those who need to brush up on how exactly all the different combinations work out)? --Steelviper 19:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right that most of this article is dedicated to genetics, however, these genetics can mean that the cattle are either Angus cattle or Red Angus. I don't think that that information should be summarised like that, however, i'll put in a link to Mendelian inheritance. CattleGirl 02:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  After I posted the above, I noticed the line in "Angus cattle" that says, "Red Angus cattle do occur as the result of a recessive gene". For me, the Recessive gene part covers all the different scenarios outlined with just a couple of words, but maybe I'm too close to the subject to be objective. Genetics (as outlined briefly in the Red Angus Association of America article) are what set them apart, so maybe it's not a bad idea for those concepts to be featured so prominently. --Steelviper 15:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mendellian inheritance 

message: While I have worked enough with both Black Angus and Red to appreciate some of their differences, I can see how an outsider might want these articles merged. There is little material that distinguishes the characteristics of the breeds in this article. Is there any citable material that we could reference that talk about the differences in temperment, etc? --Steelviper 19:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I too work with both Black Angus and Red Angus, but i disagree with the merging of the articles, as they are two different breeds, and both merit an article of their own. Over the next few days i'll work to put in more information on the breed, and i know of some websites that talk about the differences in Red Angus and Black Angus that i can put in. However, i strongly disagree with merging the two articles, as they are definitely two very separate breeds. CattleGirl 02:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't arguing that the two articles be merged, just that more distinguishing/unique information be put over here. My point was that one didn't already know better (and I do), that I could see the argument for the merge given the article contents. I'd just like to see the content of this article "beefed up" (ooh, sorry about that one) so that a reader new to the topic could see why it merits its own article and some of the ways they are different. It sounds like you're on it. Thanks! --Steelviper 14:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Differences vs. Black Angus 

message: The origin paragraph is confusing, and several statements are doubtful.  Rather than putting lots of queries in the text, I'm raising them here first.
It is said that "the Red Angus originally began in Europe", but "was introduced to Scotland and England during raids".  However, England and Scotland are European countries -- so where did it originate if not there?  Whose raids?  Why did it not simply arise in Scotland?  And surely this is the origin of the black Angus anyway?
Later it says that the Longhorn is the origin of the red colour in the "Aberdeen Angus".  Surely only in the Red Angus?  Is there evidence for this origin (there is no shortage of other candidates in Britain)?
There is a discussion of beef prices in the 18th century – all very interesting, but it is not explained how this is relevant to the origin of the breed.
Then there is the claim that the "Angus is the only breed of cattle in the world that started out bred exclusively for beef".  As stated this is just plain wrong – I wonder if it's meant to say something else?  There must be dozens of cattle breeds that started out in this way (especially in recent decades), and anyway it would be very hard to prove that it applied to an older breed such as the Angus.  Perhaps "the first breed"...?  Either way, such a claim needs a very convincing reference.
Finally, the "Origin" para does not actually include what to me seems more important and interesting, the origin of polled cattle in Scotland (both Angus and Galloway).  It also gives little clue as to what date the Angus began to be regarded as a separate breed.--Richard New Forest 08:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin 

message: The WikiProject classification for Red Angus was Start-class. It has been reclassified as Stub-class per request.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  16:11, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reclassified as stub 

message: Hi, I have been working hard on adding information to this article for over 3 weeks now. I have corrected the History section and the Characteristic section. I added am info box, uses section, as well as a small section over the the RAAA. I added 11 sources to the page as well. Hopefully it will make the article higher than a stub and possible up to a C class. Feel free to correct what i did, I don't mean to hurt anyone's feelings by changing anything i had to remove some stuff because it wasn't cited. Have a fantastic day.
Bliming99 (talk) 15:16, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: , I think you have been editing as part of a school project? Please ask your teacher to explain to you the difference between an independent reliable source and somebody's random or commercial website; I've removed some (or all?) of the sources you added for that reason. Your school may have access to some academic databases; you could consider reading some of these articles to see if any of them has useful, relevant information that could be used to improve the article. Welcome to Wikipedia! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:31, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding on 

message: I deleted a sentence in the consumption area because it was repetitive. Sydthack (talk) 16:58, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consumption 

message: Would it be OK to add a "in popular culture" subheading, and add the phrase "pepper your angus" (a twisted version of "prepare your anus")?  This phrase is popular on internet message boards, online games, etc. TAPwiki (talk) 20:22, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Pepper your angus"