Talk:Goat
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Goat article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives (index): 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | Goat has been listed as one of the Agriculture, food and drink good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 30, 2024. (Reviewed version). |
| This  level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.png){kind=small}
 | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Goat was copied or moved into Goat farming with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Missing content GOAT (sports culture)?
There should be content about GOAT (sports culture) in the culture section. 2001:4455:389:2700:7822:3156:B9D2:8410 (talk) 14:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- Isn't that just the word "goat" with a totally different meaning, not related to the actual animal? As the hat-note says, "This article is about the domesticated species of goat... For other uses, see Goat (disambiguation)." DMacks (talk) 14:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, Wikipedia articles are about things not words; Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:55, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
🐐︎
@Remsense: It seems plausible IMO, the goat emoji has its own mention and img in the linked article. I feel like most people typing that into the searchbar, due to the emoji's slang sense, are going to be looking for the GOAT abbreviation. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 06:11, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Remsense: Any response? :3 I think adding it back is not unreasonable looking at the possibility of it being typed into the search bar in order to find its meaning + it is mentioned at the target article which ofc makes it a stronger case. We use hatnotes like that one if the meaning of a redirect is ambiguous as is evidently the case of 🐐︎. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 01:17, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- No one would put the emoji into the search bar and expect to get to that article. It's pointless clutter at the top of an article. Remsense ‥ 论 01:50, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Why not? It got 36 page views in the last 30 days. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 02:09, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Right, because it was visible at the top of a high-traffic article, not because it was where they originally wanted to go. Even if not, 1 view/day is quite low, given we already have a disambiguation page also. Remsense ‥ 论 02:16, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- There is no disambig for 🐐︎ though, which only has two meanings. I agree the page views are low, but is there any guideline/policy that hints at a limited page view requirement for a disambig hatnote? Otherwise, I see no actual reason to exclude it. @Remsense: ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 18:08, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- It means "goat", given it is a pictograph of a goat. A link to the article about the homographic acronym is on Goat (disambiguation), though maybe it should be moved further up? Remsense 🌈 论 18:32, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
- There is no disambig for 🐐︎ though, which only has two meanings. I agree the page views are low, but is there any guideline/policy that hints at a limited page view requirement for a disambig hatnote? Otherwise, I see no actual reason to exclude it. @Remsense: ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 18:08, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- Right, because it was visible at the top of a high-traffic article, not because it was where they originally wanted to go. Even if not, 1 view/day is quite low, given we already have a disambiguation page also. Remsense ‥ 论 02:16, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Why not? It got 36 page views in the last 30 days. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 02:09, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- No one would put the emoji into the search bar and expect to get to that article. It's pointless clutter at the top of an article. Remsense ‥ 论 01:50, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
Etymology of "goat"
The etymology in this article isn't the same as the etymology in the Wiktionary article on "goat", which says that the Proto-Germanic cannot go back to a PIE form. How can this be reconciled? I think that the etymology listed here should be changed to agree with the information presented in Wiktionary. DdeWylvyn (talk) 14:56, 3 September 2025 (UTC)