Talk:Beef

message: It seems there is a bit of a content dispute going on here, yet there is no current discussion here about it. The page is now protected form editing to give you all a chance to discuss this properly instead of just reverting one another. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cease fire 

message: It would be nice if the article included a Amino Acid Content Ratio of Beef. 2602:306:C518:6C40:F04C:9D27:545:1601 (talk) 01:31, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amino Acid Content Ratio of Beef 

message: Does anybody think having a list of recalls of beef products (in the US/Canada it seems) is encyclopedic? I propose deleting it. Alexbrn (talk) 05:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: In this article, maybe not in great detail, but I could see it appearing somewhere else.  For example, see the many articles and lists we have over at :Category:Food recalls. Viriditas (talk) 01:09, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it appears particularly notable as a whole. Individual recalls can become noteworthy if they were associated with unique events that establish some weight (maybe associated with  BSE, market taking a big hit afterwards, etc.), but I feel like we'd be moving towards an indiscriminate list otherwise. Kingofaces43 (talk) 19:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree this list is undue here. We can spin-off a list if we want. nafSadh did say 19:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of recalls 

message: --Jot de (talk) 14:46, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Inomyabcs (talk) 00:06, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2015 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Beef. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.kobe-niku.jp/contents/export/
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/pyramids.html
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_003_2011_Expanded/index.asp
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_008-2011_Release/index.asp
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/recall_039_2011_release/index.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:29, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Beef. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120114094726/http://www.wickedlocal.com:80/norwell/news/x1468791409/Hannaford-announces-ground-beef-recall to http://www.wickedlocal.com/norwell/news/x1468791409/Hannaford-announces-ground-beef-recall#axzz1ivNjoWuw
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:18, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi authors, the USDA grading section is great content but to delve into such depth on the Beef page is not appropriate since Beef itself is not region-specific. I have created a new page Beef carcass classification which would be an appropriate place to record multiple countries' beef grading customs. I have cut/pasted the USDA Grading section there.
DouglasHeld (talk) 22:00, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  USDA grading section is USA centric 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Beef. 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/20150402124610/https://ahd.maharashtra.gov.in/pdf/apa1976.pdf to https://ahd.maharashtra.gov.in/pdf/apa1976.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120112101355/http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/emergingissues/downloads/dioxins.pdf to http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/emergingissues/downloads/dioxins.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160305114818/http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biosafety/tse_bse/dg_sanco_en.htm to http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biosafety/tse_bse/dg_sanco_en.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:39, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Beef is a term used for cattle/cow meat not buffalo meat. India exports buffalo meat, some IP is trying to add wrong info regarding this on the page. 112.110.112.78 (talk) 21:46, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: if its a factual misinformation, https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/carabeef  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.2.170.188 (talk) 15:26, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  India exports buffalo meat not beef. 

message: There is twitter feed in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beef&diff=787098461&oldid=787091988 and lacks clarity overall, editors could you integrate and make it lean ...
Meanwhile murders are happening here and there in each week from a controversial bill:http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2017/06/29/even-as-modi-condemns-violence-in-the-name-of-cow-protection-mu_a_23008312/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.241.54.57 (talk) 14:16, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit request

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Beef. 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/20080213184210/http://www.comp-archaeology.org/WendorfSAA98.html to http://www.comp-archaeology.org/WendorfSAA98.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070818062130/http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/qual/en/1bbab_en.htm to http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/qual/en/1bbab_en.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Cow-thefts-on-the-rise-in-India-For-new-breed-of-rustlers-nothing-is-sacred/articleshow/20290663.cms
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_%26_Events/Recall_003_2011_Expanded/index.asp
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_%26_Events/Recall_008-2011_Release/index.asp
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_%26_Events/recall_039_2011_release/index.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:14, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Some people here seem to have an issue with the term "cow meat" in the lead. Sure, it's less commonly used than "beef," (which is why it shouldn't be the title), but it's still used. Searching for "cow meat" brings up 688,000 results on google and 3,700 results on google scholar. "Cow meat" is even a popular redirect for this article. 
Also, someone said it's POV. To me, that just doesn't make sense. Is "horse meat," "dog meat," and all other "BLANK meat" articles inherently POV now? Of course not. 
So, are we in agreement now? Can we stop removing it now?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariolovr (talk • contribs) 17:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  Goggle hit counting is not an acceptable source.  Provide a source and we can discuss. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 10:14, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You're being awfully aggressive about this. You even followed my contributions to comment here. Could you please explain yourself instead of just saying no? Why isn't google hit counting not acceptable? I've seen it used in other discussions like this. And what do you mean I haven't given a source? I already linked one in the edit comment, and that fact that "cow meat" is a popular redirect for this article is a source of itself. But since you want more: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/cow-meat-going-out-of-india-as-carabeef-police-investigation-on/articleshow/63374600.cms?from=mdr https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/crime-can-stop-if-people-dont-eat-cow-meat-rss-leader/articleshow/65114646.cms https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/no-one-can-have-the-audacity-to-export-cow-meat-from-up-yogi-adityanath/articleshow/61520444.cms  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariolovr (talk • contribs) 15:23, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

text: As you can see, aside from just being a lesser used synonym of "beef", "cow meat" is also regularly used to avoid confusion with buffalo meat, which is also called beef. Since this article is about beef from cattle, not beef from buffalo, it should be clearly defined from the beginning.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariolovr (talk • contribs) 16:16, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cow meat 

message: There is a very evident bias in the first two paragraphs of this article. Many of the things listed are misleading and without citation. 140.254.77.135 (talk) 13:13, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: As mentioned earlier, WP:LEADCITE needs to be read. Sources are not needed there since content needs to be sourced in the body. That said, I am finding a few places were sources need to be used with more care, but it looks more like omissions due to people being unfamiliar with farming. Still, it's best to focus on specific content and lining it up with reliable sources. KoA (talk) 13:21, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obvious bias 

message: A discussion regarding this article has been started at WP:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#Concern about Pro-Vegan and Pro-Animal Rights Bias. ––Formal talk 18:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral point of view Noticeboard 

message: shouldn't environmental impact be it's own heading. 2601:1C1:8481:AB80:D5C2:28CE:D676:1609 (talk) 07:54, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the purpose of including the environmental impact in the production section 

message: The comment on nutritional value in the intro, "beef contains protein, iron, and vitamin B12", seems unnecessary. It's already discussed in the nutritional section, and doesn't describe anything unique or important to understanding the topic. I haven't removed it, as some other entries on widely-consumed foods include similar statements in the lede, but I question the value of its inclusion. Ertal72 (talk) 01:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I added that when I was trying to summarise each and every section, which is what the lede is for, but since that's now been abandoned I agree it's currently a little disproportionate since it's basically as long as the section it's supposed to be summarising. Personally, I'm okay with it being taken out for now. ─ ReconditeRodent « talk · contribs » 11:30, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

text: Ertal72, if you read WP:LEAD, it is supposed to summarize the existing body of the article, so it is supposed to have redundancy. This bit doesn't really strike as anything undue since it's just briefly summarizing the nutrition and later health section in the next sentence. The nutrition section itself could maybe be expanded to then improve the lead sentence though. KoA (talk) 14:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unnecessary comment on nutritional value in lede