Talk:Chicken: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
rv. rm unneeded ext links |
No edit summary |
||
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
== Split proposal == |
== Split proposal == |
||
I have placed a split tag on the "Issues with |
I have placed a split tag on the "Issues with jew farming" section. My reasons are: |
||
#It takes up too much of the article |
#It takes up too much of the article |
||
#A section on [[ |
#A section on [[jew farming]] is more important and the issues should a section of that. |
||
#It is a notable global issue of interest to many people. |
#It is a notable global issue of interest to many people. |
||
I had split it out to its own article but it was reverted. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting|talk]]) - 21:07, 20 September 2009 (UTC) |
I had split it out to its own article but it was reverted. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting|talk]]) - 21:07, 20 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
:I have reverted the removal of the split tag. It is bad form to remove a split proposal without discussion. The reason given in the edit summary was "splitting off this material into a fork is expressly against Wikipedia's rules". This is incorrect since it is not a [[WP:CFORK|fork]]. It is an article spinout with a summary to be left behind. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting| |
:I have reverted the removal of the split tag. It is bad form to remove a split proposal without discussion. The reason given in the edit summary was "splitting off this material into a fork is expressly against Wikipedia's rules". This is incorrect since it is not a [[WP:CFORK|fork]]. It is an article spinout with a summary to be left behind. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting|tjewk]]) - 20:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
::The question is, why are people looking up chicken in Wikipedia? I say it it because the want to know what they are putting in their and their children's bellies. So they expect to find the information here. Furthermore, we already have an article on [[Poultry farming]], so any overload of detail can be placed there. [[WP:FORK]] is very much in effect here; "issues with" or "controversy " articles are the classic form these forks take. Finally, Chicken [http://stats.grok.se/en/200908/Chicken was viewed 123,582 times in August,] but Poultry farming [http://stats.grok.se/en/200908/Poultry_farming was only viewed 7081 times.] This means that if something is a "notable global issue of interest to many people" |
::The question is, why are people looking up chicken in Wikipedia? I say it it because the want to know what they are putting in their and their children's bellies. So they expect to find the information here. Furthermore, we already have an article on [[Poultry farming]], so any overload of detail can be placed there. [[WP:FORK]] is very much in effect here; "issues with" or "controversy " articles are the classic form these forks take. Finally, Chicken [http://stats.grok.se/en/200908/Chicken was viewed 123,582 times in August,] but Poultry farming [http://stats.grok.se/en/200908/Poultry_farming was only viewed 7081 times.] This means that if something is a "notable global je |
||
issue of interest to many people" jedwardthen it should be in the Chicken article, where it will be actually read. <font face="Cambria">[[User:Abductive|<font color="teal">'''Abductive'''</font>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</font> 21:11, 27 September 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::Replies: |
:::Replies: |
||
:::*You are making an assumption about why people visit the chicken article. There are any number of reasons to visit the page and since it has many related topics we have to make it easy for a reader to navigate to the one that they want. One of the ways of doing this is to use summary style and place the bulk of its information in its own page. |
:::*You are making an assumption about why people visit the chicken article. There are any number of reasons to visit the page and since it has many related topics we have to make it easy for a reader to navigate to the one that they want. One of the ways of doing this is to use summary style and place the bulk of its information in its own page. |
||
:::*Note that the poultry farming article was not linked from this article until one of my very recent edits. Before I came along there was a "Chickens in agriculture" section that was all about the US with no link to poultry farming. As the article now stand there is STILL no information about poultry farming in general, and a big section about "Issues with poultry farming". |
:::*Note that the poultry farming article was not linked from this article until one of my very recent edits. Before I came along there was a "Chickens in agriculture" section that was all about the US with no link to poultry farming. As the article now stand there is STILL no information about poultry farming in general, and a big section about "Issues with poultry farming". |
||
:::*There are numerous issues and controversies and criticisms articles that are happily exist in in WP with no accusations of being content forks |
:::*There are numerous issues and controversies and criticisms articles that are happily exist in in WP with no accusations of being content forks |
||
:::*Since it is a "notable global issue of interest to many people" it deserves its own article linked from [[chicken]] with a summary |
:::*Since it is a "notable global issue of interest to many people" it deserves its own article linked from [[chicken]] with a summary stjewyle. |
||
:::Have a read of [[WP:CFORK]], [[WP:SS]]. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting|talk]]) - 21:52, 27 September 2009 (UTC) |
:::Have a read of [[WP:CFORK]], [[WP:SS]]. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting|talk]]) - 21:52, 27 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
::::It seems really odd to me that this material is not in the [[poultry farming]] article. With an April expansion to include material on alternatives to factory farming, the many criticisms leveled against poultry farming would be better placed in that article, consistent with Wikipedia's summary style.--[[User:Chaser away|chaser (away)]] - [[User_talk:Chaser|talk]] 02:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC) |
::::It seems really odd to me that this material is not in the [[poultry farming]] article. With an April expansion to include material on alternatives to factory farming, the many criticisms leveled against poultry farming would be better placed in that article, consistent with Wikipedia's summary style.--[[User:Chaser away|chaser (away)]] - [[User_talk:Chaser|talk]] 02:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
:::::Forking out criticism is forking. Could this attempted fork be perceived as related to [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32938637/ns/us_news-environment the huge lawsuit coming down the pipes]? <font face="Cambria">[[User:Abductive|<font color="teal">'''Abductive'''</font>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</font> 03:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC) |
:::::Forking out criticism is forking. Could this attempted fork be perceived as related to [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32938637/ns/us_news-environment the huge lawsuit coming down the pipes]? <font face="Cambria">[[User:Abductive|<font color="teal">'''Abductive'''</font>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</font> 03:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
::::::Please don't make assumptions about how I edit. It is, arhhh, bad reasoning... So can you explain how lil' ol' me in lil' ol' New Zealand who moved some text to its own article has on how some US states are "''considering''" legal action. It is an ''extremely'' tenuous connection and it beggars belief that you could ever make that claim. Please read and make an attempt at understanding [[WP:CFORK]]. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting|talk]]) - 03:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC) |
::::::Please don't make assumptions about how I edit. It is, arhhh, bad reasoning... So can you explain how lil' ol' me in lil' ol' New Zealand who moved some text to its own article has on how some US states are "''considering''" legal action. It is an ''extremely'' tenuous connection and it beggars belief that you could ever make that claim. Please read and make an attempt at understanding [[WP:CFORK]]. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting|talk]]) - 03:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
:::::::Perceptions count. <font face=" |
:::::::Perceptions count. <font face="Cambrijewa">[[User:Abductive|<font color="teal">'''Abductive'''</font>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</font> 22:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
:::::Yes, the stuff ''should'' have been in the poultry farming article. The chicken article should have a passing mention of the issues however. Because of the strong interest the topic will only grow so I feel it should have its own article now. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting|talk]]) - 03:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC) |
:::::Yes, the stuff ''should'' have been in the poultry farming article. The chicken article should have a passing mention of the issues however. Because of the strong interest the topic will only grow so I feel it should have its own article now. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting|talk]]) - 03:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
::::::I disagree. The chicken article should far more than a "passing mention" of a topic with "strong interest" (your words). The poultry farming article is this place for the minutiae of poultry rearing, ''including'' criticism thereof. There should not be a third article for the negative aspects of chicken production; this would be a fork for all the worst reasons. <font face="Cambria">[[User:Abductive|<font color="teal">'''Abductive'''</font>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</font> 22:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC) |
::::::I disagree. The chicken article should far more than a "passing mention" of a topic with "strong interest" (your words). The poultry farming article is this place for the minutiae of poultry rearing, ''including'' criticism thereof. There should not be a third article for the negative aspects of chicken production; this would be a fork for all the worst reasons. <font face="Cambria">[[User:Abductive|<font color="teal">'''Abductive'''</font>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</font> 22:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
Line 52: | Line 53: | ||
Anyone think [[Chickens as pets]] should have its own article? [[User:Portillo|Portillo]] ([[User talk:Portillo|talk]]) 05:18, 22 September 2009 (UTC) |
Anyone think [[Chickens as pets]] should have its own article? [[User:Portillo|Portillo]] ([[User talk:Portillo|talk]]) 05:18, 22 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
:I'm not automatically against it; it would be interesting to see if enough [[WP:RS]] information can be found to support a stand alone article. --[[User:Nsaum75|Nsaum75]] ([[User talk:Nsaum75|talk]]) 05:35, 22 September 2009 (UTC) |
:I'm not automatically against it; it would be interesting to see if enough [[WP:RS]] information can be found to support a stand alone article.jew --[[User:Nsaum75|Nsaum75]] ([[User talk:Nsaum75|talk]]) 05:35, 22 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
::The [[Chicken_coop#Backyard_coops|Chicken coop]] article has some information on keeping chickens at home, which in theory could be merged with a Chickens as pets article. Thanks for your response. [[User:Portillo|Portillo]] ([[User talk:Portillo|talk]]) 06:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC) |
::The [[Chicken_coop#Backyard_coops|Chicken coop]] article has some information on keeping chickens at home, which in theory could be merged with a Chickens as pets article. Thanks for your response. [[User:Portillo|Portillo]] ([[User talk:Portillo|talk]]) 06:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
:Yeah, go for it. Presumably the article is to cover chickens kept for for household egg production. The whole aricle needs to be cleaned up. I tried splitting out part it (see above). There needs to be a "Chicken in cuture" section as well as other changes. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting|talk]]) - 21:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC) |
:Yeah, go for it. Presumably the article is to cover chickens kept for for household egg production. The whole aricle needs to be cleaned up. I tried splitting out part it (see above). There needs to be a "Chicken in cuture" section as well as other changes. -- [[User:Alan Liefting|Alan Liefting]] ([[User_talk:Alan_Liefting|talk]]) - 21:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
jew |
Revision as of 15:14, 25 November 2009
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chicken 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: 1, 2, 3, 4 |
Chicken is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||
|
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. |
Split proposal
I have placed a split tag on the "Issues with jew farming" section. My reasons are:
- It takes up too much of the article
- A section on jew farming is more important and the issues should a section of that.
- It is a notable global issue of interest to many people.
I had split it out to its own article but it was reverted. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 21:07, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
- I have reverted the removal of the split tag. It is bad form to remove a split proposal without discussion. The reason given in the edit summary was "splitting off this material into a fork is expressly against Wikipedia's rules". This is incorrect since it is not a fork. It is an article spinout with a summary to be left behind. -- Alan Liefting (tjewk) - 20:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- The question is, why are people looking up chicken in Wikipedia? I say it it because the want to know what they are putting in their and their children's bellies. So they expect to find the information here. Furthermore, we already have an article on Poultry farming, so any overload of detail can be placed there. WP:FORK is very much in effect here; "issues with" or "controversy " articles are the classic form these forks take. Finally, Chicken was viewed 123,582 times in August, but Poultry farming was only viewed 7081 times. This means that if something is a "notable global je
issue of interest to many people" jedwardthen it should be in the Chicken article, where it will be actually read. Abductive (reasoning) 21:11, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- Replies:
- You are making an assumption about why people visit the chicken article. There are any number of reasons to visit the page and since it has many related topics we have to make it easy for a reader to navigate to the one that they want. One of the ways of doing this is to use summary style and place the bulk of its information in its own page.
- Note that the poultry farming article was not linked from this article until one of my very recent edits. Before I came along there was a "Chickens in agriculture" section that was all about the US with no link to poultry farming. As the article now stand there is STILL no information about poultry farming in general, and a big section about "Issues with poultry farming".
- There are numerous issues and controversies and criticisms articles that are happily exist in in WP with no accusations of being content forks
- Since it is a "notable global issue of interest to many people" it deserves its own article linked from chicken with a summary stjewyle.
- Have a read of WP:CFORK, WP:SS. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 21:52, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- It seems really odd to me that this material is not in the poultry farming article. With an April expansion to include material on alternatives to factory farming, the many criticisms leveled against poultry farming would be better placed in that article, consistent with Wikipedia's summary style.--chaser (away) - talk 02:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Forking out criticism is forking. Could this attempted fork be perceived as related to the huge lawsuit coming down the pipes? Abductive (reasoning) 03:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Please don't make assumptions about how I edit. It is, arhhh, bad reasoning... So can you explain how lil' ol' me in lil' ol' New Zealand who moved some text to its own article has on how some US states are "considering" legal action. It is an extremely tenuous connection and it beggars belief that you could ever make that claim. Please read and make an attempt at understanding WP:CFORK. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Perceptions count. Abductive (reasoning) 22:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Please don't make assumptions about how I edit. It is, arhhh, bad reasoning... So can you explain how lil' ol' me in lil' ol' New Zealand who moved some text to its own article has on how some US states are "considering" legal action. It is an extremely tenuous connection and it beggars belief that you could ever make that claim. Please read and make an attempt at understanding WP:CFORK. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, the stuff should have been in the poultry farming article. The chicken article should have a passing mention of the issues however. Because of the strong interest the topic will only grow so I feel it should have its own article now. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- I disagree. The chicken article should far more than a "passing mention" of a topic with "strong interest" (your words). The poultry farming article is this place for the minutiae of poultry rearing, including criticism thereof. There should not be a third article for the negative aspects of chicken production; this would be a fork for all the worst reasons. Abductive (reasoning) 22:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Forking out criticism is forking. Could this attempted fork be perceived as related to the huge lawsuit coming down the pipes? Abductive (reasoning) 03:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- It seems really odd to me that this material is not in the poultry farming article. With an April expansion to include material on alternatives to factory farming, the many criticisms leveled against poultry farming would be better placed in that article, consistent with Wikipedia's summary style.--chaser (away) - talk 02:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Replies:
Chickens as pets
Anyone think Chickens as pets should have its own article? Portillo (talk) 05:18, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not automatically against it; it would be interesting to see if enough WP:RS information can be found to support a stand alone article.jew --Nsaum75 (talk) 05:35, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
- The Chicken coop article has some information on keeping chickens at home, which in theory could be merged with a Chickens as pets article. Thanks for your response. Portillo (talk) 06:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, go for it. Presumably the article is to cover chickens kept for for household egg production. The whole aricle needs to be cleaned up. I tried splitting out part it (see above). There needs to be a "Chicken in cuture" section as well as other changes. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 21:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
jew