![]() | Aberdeen Angus was nominated as a Natural sciences good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (August 27, 2015). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The entries for other breeds such as Holstein include average sizes. That would be useful here too.
Are Red Angus not the product of a recessive gene carried by the Black Angus?
What are some uses for Black Angus cattle? -- Anonymous
Since you asked... some of the many uses for Black Angus cattle:
AlbertCahalan
04:02, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
The article states Angus beef is marbled meat, which according to that article is bad and fatty; then towards the end of the Angus article it says the meat is considered lean. Which is it?
eae 02:26, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
The correct term for what Angus beef provides is marbling. Somebody with an axe to grind might call that bad but it's a key factor in the popularity of the Angus breed. Please keep commentary on the health impact of marbling out of this article, it has no place here.
Relative to other breeds, Angus cattle do not produce lean beef. They provide a genetic source of better marbling. Jeff Schroeder ( talk · contribs)
It's been suggested that Angus cattle be merged with Red Angus. I created the Red Angus page, and I don't think these two pages should be merged for the following reasons...
Even though the genetics of the two breeds are very similar, the fact remains that the breeds are separate breeds. Angus Australia talks about the 'red angus relatives' here, and Australia, as well as a lot of other countries, has an official website here. This is also being discussed at the Red Angus talk page. I should also mention that although the two breeds are similar, the reason they are classified as different breeds is because of different genetics and coat colour Once more, I would like to stress that these are two different breeds of cattle, and I think that both breeds should merit separate pages on Wikipedia. Please discuss this here. CattleGirl 02:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
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 hence the effort was put forward to propagate the black cows rather than red.
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 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. Please merge the two pages. TomasMFC ( talk) 22:53, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Angus cattle → Black Angus — Black Angus is the actual name of the breed, and this title will also give it more equality to Red Angus. Also see my comment below. CattleGirl talk | e@ | review me! 06:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
For some of the more international aspects you were interested in, check out the Angus Society of Australia web pages:
There are probably similar sites for other places such as South Africa, Brazil, Argentina, etc. Gene Nygaard 15:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
I am a lifelong Angus cattle breeder and had some notes to make. Firstly, the article claims that Angus have a high-yielding carcass. In fact, the Angus have the next-to-worst dressing percentage. The only worse yields are from the dairy breeds. Our own herd averages just under 63% dressing. That is right in line with Angus average. The Continentals will beat that by 1 or 2 points. Secondly, the term marbling seems to have generated some controversy. Marbling (IM fat) is entirely different from BF (backfat or external fat). Marbling is known to increase tenderness and flavor. BF is simply wasted and trimmed off at the packing floor. There is a common misconception that ONLY grain feeding will produce marbling and that ONLY high BFs will give good marbling. We have had many, many "fats" that grade choice or prime with less than .2 inches of BF. Explain that! Some cattle can grade choice with no grain whatsoever. Thirdly, regarding the comments about the reds being present in "Black Angus" as a recessive gene. This is patently false. All purebred Angus (black) are homozygous black and will not create "1/4 reds" or "1/4 red carriers" unless there is a red animal back in the pedigree somewhere. This is common in the commercials, but not registered Angus. The comment about Angus being heavier milkers is also not true. They milk at a very OPTIMAL level (sustainably....which is positive), but they will not outmilk the Continentals as a percentage of milk per bodyweight. That is why they do re-breed (fertility!) better than any cattle, bar none. Another thing...Angus are not the champs at marbling either, much as we would like our consumers to think. The Jerseys and the Shorthorns will beat the Angus anyday. In fact, many "disreputable" breeders create higher marbling cattle by injecting an 1/8 or 1/16 of Jersey or Brown Swiss or Wagyu. You must remember how they got the rep for marbling---because the consumer and packer was comparing it to the Continentals and the Bos Indicus, which are inferior marblers. The latter are also known to be tough on the Warner-Bratzler Shear Test. 66.82.9.17 01:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved.
Fred- Chess 09:03, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Though it wasn't really a Herculean task — and I have no idea whether the cattle of King Augeas were Aberdeen Angus or not — having seen that all the discussions about moving and merging ended in 2006 but the first part of this article was still a real mess in terms of the Categorical imperative (to decide what each of a set of terms means and then stick to it) it became apparent that the following were the case:
Therefore I have:
If the article did not exist at all yet, I think I would argue that it should be called "Aberdeen Angus cattle" because of its historical importance as expressing the origin of the breed, and the continued wide use of that name everywhere in the world except the USA. I would also argue that, whether one breed or two, the place to discuss details of breed characteristics is the websites of those breed associations, not a general encyclopaedia. That the farmers in the USA have two different clubs (really that is what they are) for red and black varieties is a detail of their business/social circles, not necessarily a fact that merits separate articles in general encyclopaedia; however, the fact that Wiki is on the web and thus hypertext, and that it has millions of what are mostly brief articles on specialized points, makes it not worth engineering a merge purely on grounds of page length and the ease of clicking.
So I trust everyone who looks here finds the new text OK. In any case, please do not revert to the shambolic previous version of the text! Why it had sat like that for up to 2 years since the debate about moves and merges beats me. I put it down to everyone being too busy, and none of them being expert writers. Iph ( talk) 16:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
It has been proposed to move Aberdeen to Aberdeen, Scotland or Aberdeen city, and to move Aberdeen (disambiguation) to Aberdeen. The discussion about this is here. The dab page notes Angus cattle are also known as Aberdeen Angus cattle. -- Una Smith ( talk) 16:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
May 17, 2012? Please confirm the date on the United States section of the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibrantspirit ( talk • contribs) 16:00, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't this article mention the common myth that Angus beef refers to the part of the cattle it comes from, like sirloin? After all, Jack in the Box actually ran television advertisements in 2007 based on that myth and was sued by Burger King as a result. -- Coolcaesar ( talk) 21:52, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
It says Black Angus is the most common breed in the USA, with 324,266 animals registered in 2005. But on 1 July 2012, there were 97.8 million cattle in the USA. Seems strange that out of 100 million animals only 325k would belong to the most populous breed. That would mean there are at least 300 breeds also with 300k each. So I'm guessing this '324,266' figure is ambiguous: is that the total number of animals registered, or the total number registered during that year? Also, what percentage of total cattle are 'registered'? Leecharleswalker ( talk) 13:40, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
A larger portion of beef cattle in the US are crossbred. This is to take advantage of hybrid vigor and produce beef that gains optimally in a specific climate. For example, the King Ranch in Texas is constantly refining new crossbreds, breeding for things like efficiency of gain in their climate. These crossbreds are what make up the vast majority of the cattle you see. Also, most are unregistered. The Black Angus is the most common purebred in the USA. The most common type in the USA is likely crossbred ("XB" on travel papers)-- AslanEntropy ( talk) 02:15, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Casliber ( talk · contribs) 21:38, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I'll take a look at this one and jot down queries below. Cheers,
Cas Liber (
talk ·
contribs)
21:38, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Okay, plenty of work on this one - fascinating topic and I'll try and help dig up some material. Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 22:04, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
I think that the article is ready for a second reading/summary as I have now addressed all concerns raised. Thank you very much for this review!
TheMagikCow (
talk)
07:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Okay then! All fixed. Thank you
Casliber (
talk ·
contribs)!
TheMagikCow (
talk)
11:01, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
I am confident that all issues are now fixed. If any our outstanding, could you please highlight them to me below? Thanks!
TheMagikCow (
talk)
19:26, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Cas Liber, have you done a read-through for prose quality? I'm running across many sentences that I'm having trouble parsing. In some cases, it seems to be misplaced (or missing commas), but some need more work than that. One example is the final United States sentence, It was formed because the breeders had had their cattle struck off the herd book, for not conforming to changed breed standard, of colour.
I also believe the Genetic disorders subsection needs revising to reach the "clear and concise" GA benchmark.
BlueMoonset (
talk)
17:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
1. Well written?:
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
3. Broad in coverage?:
4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
5. Reasonably stable?
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
Overall:
In response to a request at WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, I just completed a copy-edit of the article. I have several concerns:
1) The article seems to be written in a curious blend of American and British English:
It doesn't matter to me which style is used. Once a style is agreed upon, I'd be glad to make the necessary changes.
2) In the "Scotland" section under Angus cattle#History is the following sentence:
It's not clear which society is meant by "the society". I think it should be written out here.
3) In the second paragraph of the "United States" section of Angus cattle#History, we read:
But in the second paragraph of the lead, we read:
and in the middle of the first paragraph in Angus cattle#Characteristics, we read:
If there were "red and black animals" in 1885, how can we say "more recently red colours have emerged" and "in the middle of the 20th century a new strain of cattle called the Red Angus emerged"? If the red Angus cattle in the 20th century are a different type of cattle from the red cattle in 1885, this needs to be explained. Also, what does "more recently" mean?
4) In the first paragraph of Angus cattle#Genetic disorders, do you think "curly calf" and "water head" should be in italics while "Fawn Calf Syndrome" is both capitalized and in quotation marks?
5) In Angus cattle#Uses is the following sentence:
I wonder whether "adopt it into the mainstream" ought to be explained or re-worded so that the average reader will readily understand it.
6) In the last paragraph in the section Angus cattle#Commercial, we read:
However, there are not ten items in the list; there are eleven. Also, I noticed that some of the items seem to refer to the animal itself and some to the meat. I wonder if the list should be grouped. If not, O.K., but I draw your attention to the last item. It is not clear whether it refers to the animal or the meat.
7) The first two sentences in Angus cattle#Commercial are:
Clearly, these are out of chronological order, and, other than the word "however", it is not clear why they are out of chronological order or even why the need for "however". Corinne ( talk) 00:19, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
P.S. I was just looking at my edits in the Revision History, and I see that I somehow messed up an in-text reference. I thought I should change the single curly quotation mark to a regular straight quotation mark. Could someone fix this for me? Thanks. Corinne ( talk) 00:29, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
I have read through the talk page, article and breed societies, and there seems to be little consistency between the naming of this breed. Many countries refer to them as just "Angus", or "Black/Red Angus", however the UK-based and Irish societies refer to them as "Aberdeen-Angus", hyphenated.
Would it not make sense, given that the breed originated in Scotland, in the UK, that its name be listed as the name that is used by The Aberdeen-Angus Cattle Society? At the very least, the usage of Aberdeen-Angus throughout the article should be hyphenated.
Additionally, the remark that the breed is known by Aberdeen Angus in most parts of the world is not necessarily correct, as it appears that a very large number of breed societies refer to them as Angus, rather than Aberdeen-Angus. Slimestone ( talk) 14:07, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Could somebody please expand on King George's importation of cattle into America half a century after his death? 36.37.151.185 ( talk) 05:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() | Aberdeen Angus was nominated as a Natural sciences good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (August 27, 2015). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The entries for other breeds such as Holstein include average sizes. That would be useful here too.
Are Red Angus not the product of a recessive gene carried by the Black Angus?
What are some uses for Black Angus cattle? -- Anonymous
Since you asked... some of the many uses for Black Angus cattle:
AlbertCahalan
04:02, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
The article states Angus beef is marbled meat, which according to that article is bad and fatty; then towards the end of the Angus article it says the meat is considered lean. Which is it?
eae 02:26, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
The correct term for what Angus beef provides is marbling. Somebody with an axe to grind might call that bad but it's a key factor in the popularity of the Angus breed. Please keep commentary on the health impact of marbling out of this article, it has no place here.
Relative to other breeds, Angus cattle do not produce lean beef. They provide a genetic source of better marbling. Jeff Schroeder ( talk · contribs)
It's been suggested that Angus cattle be merged with Red Angus. I created the Red Angus page, and I don't think these two pages should be merged for the following reasons...
Even though the genetics of the two breeds are very similar, the fact remains that the breeds are separate breeds. Angus Australia talks about the 'red angus relatives' here, and Australia, as well as a lot of other countries, has an official website here. This is also being discussed at the Red Angus talk page. I should also mention that although the two breeds are similar, the reason they are classified as different breeds is because of different genetics and coat colour Once more, I would like to stress that these are two different breeds of cattle, and I think that both breeds should merit separate pages on Wikipedia. Please discuss this here. CattleGirl 02:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
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 hence the effort was put forward to propagate the black cows rather than red.
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 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. Please merge the two pages. TomasMFC ( talk) 22:53, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Angus cattle → Black Angus — Black Angus is the actual name of the breed, and this title will also give it more equality to Red Angus. Also see my comment below. CattleGirl talk | e@ | review me! 06:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
For some of the more international aspects you were interested in, check out the Angus Society of Australia web pages:
There are probably similar sites for other places such as South Africa, Brazil, Argentina, etc. Gene Nygaard 15:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
I am a lifelong Angus cattle breeder and had some notes to make. Firstly, the article claims that Angus have a high-yielding carcass. In fact, the Angus have the next-to-worst dressing percentage. The only worse yields are from the dairy breeds. Our own herd averages just under 63% dressing. That is right in line with Angus average. The Continentals will beat that by 1 or 2 points. Secondly, the term marbling seems to have generated some controversy. Marbling (IM fat) is entirely different from BF (backfat or external fat). Marbling is known to increase tenderness and flavor. BF is simply wasted and trimmed off at the packing floor. There is a common misconception that ONLY grain feeding will produce marbling and that ONLY high BFs will give good marbling. We have had many, many "fats" that grade choice or prime with less than .2 inches of BF. Explain that! Some cattle can grade choice with no grain whatsoever. Thirdly, regarding the comments about the reds being present in "Black Angus" as a recessive gene. This is patently false. All purebred Angus (black) are homozygous black and will not create "1/4 reds" or "1/4 red carriers" unless there is a red animal back in the pedigree somewhere. This is common in the commercials, but not registered Angus. The comment about Angus being heavier milkers is also not true. They milk at a very OPTIMAL level (sustainably....which is positive), but they will not outmilk the Continentals as a percentage of milk per bodyweight. That is why they do re-breed (fertility!) better than any cattle, bar none. Another thing...Angus are not the champs at marbling either, much as we would like our consumers to think. The Jerseys and the Shorthorns will beat the Angus anyday. In fact, many "disreputable" breeders create higher marbling cattle by injecting an 1/8 or 1/16 of Jersey or Brown Swiss or Wagyu. You must remember how they got the rep for marbling---because the consumer and packer was comparing it to the Continentals and the Bos Indicus, which are inferior marblers. The latter are also known to be tough on the Warner-Bratzler Shear Test. 66.82.9.17 01:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved.
Fred- Chess 09:03, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Though it wasn't really a Herculean task — and I have no idea whether the cattle of King Augeas were Aberdeen Angus or not — having seen that all the discussions about moving and merging ended in 2006 but the first part of this article was still a real mess in terms of the Categorical imperative (to decide what each of a set of terms means and then stick to it) it became apparent that the following were the case:
Therefore I have:
If the article did not exist at all yet, I think I would argue that it should be called "Aberdeen Angus cattle" because of its historical importance as expressing the origin of the breed, and the continued wide use of that name everywhere in the world except the USA. I would also argue that, whether one breed or two, the place to discuss details of breed characteristics is the websites of those breed associations, not a general encyclopaedia. That the farmers in the USA have two different clubs (really that is what they are) for red and black varieties is a detail of their business/social circles, not necessarily a fact that merits separate articles in general encyclopaedia; however, the fact that Wiki is on the web and thus hypertext, and that it has millions of what are mostly brief articles on specialized points, makes it not worth engineering a merge purely on grounds of page length and the ease of clicking.
So I trust everyone who looks here finds the new text OK. In any case, please do not revert to the shambolic previous version of the text! Why it had sat like that for up to 2 years since the debate about moves and merges beats me. I put it down to everyone being too busy, and none of them being expert writers. Iph ( talk) 16:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
It has been proposed to move Aberdeen to Aberdeen, Scotland or Aberdeen city, and to move Aberdeen (disambiguation) to Aberdeen. The discussion about this is here. The dab page notes Angus cattle are also known as Aberdeen Angus cattle. -- Una Smith ( talk) 16:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
May 17, 2012? Please confirm the date on the United States section of the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibrantspirit ( talk • contribs) 16:00, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't this article mention the common myth that Angus beef refers to the part of the cattle it comes from, like sirloin? After all, Jack in the Box actually ran television advertisements in 2007 based on that myth and was sued by Burger King as a result. -- Coolcaesar ( talk) 21:52, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
It says Black Angus is the most common breed in the USA, with 324,266 animals registered in 2005. But on 1 July 2012, there were 97.8 million cattle in the USA. Seems strange that out of 100 million animals only 325k would belong to the most populous breed. That would mean there are at least 300 breeds also with 300k each. So I'm guessing this '324,266' figure is ambiguous: is that the total number of animals registered, or the total number registered during that year? Also, what percentage of total cattle are 'registered'? Leecharleswalker ( talk) 13:40, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
A larger portion of beef cattle in the US are crossbred. This is to take advantage of hybrid vigor and produce beef that gains optimally in a specific climate. For example, the King Ranch in Texas is constantly refining new crossbreds, breeding for things like efficiency of gain in their climate. These crossbreds are what make up the vast majority of the cattle you see. Also, most are unregistered. The Black Angus is the most common purebred in the USA. The most common type in the USA is likely crossbred ("XB" on travel papers)-- AslanEntropy ( talk) 02:15, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Casliber ( talk · contribs) 21:38, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I'll take a look at this one and jot down queries below. Cheers,
Cas Liber (
talk ·
contribs)
21:38, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Okay, plenty of work on this one - fascinating topic and I'll try and help dig up some material. Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 22:04, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
I think that the article is ready for a second reading/summary as I have now addressed all concerns raised. Thank you very much for this review!
TheMagikCow (
talk)
07:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Okay then! All fixed. Thank you
Casliber (
talk ·
contribs)!
TheMagikCow (
talk)
11:01, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
I am confident that all issues are now fixed. If any our outstanding, could you please highlight them to me below? Thanks!
TheMagikCow (
talk)
19:26, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Cas Liber, have you done a read-through for prose quality? I'm running across many sentences that I'm having trouble parsing. In some cases, it seems to be misplaced (or missing commas), but some need more work than that. One example is the final United States sentence, It was formed because the breeders had had their cattle struck off the herd book, for not conforming to changed breed standard, of colour.
I also believe the Genetic disorders subsection needs revising to reach the "clear and concise" GA benchmark.
BlueMoonset (
talk)
17:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
1. Well written?:
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
3. Broad in coverage?:
4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
5. Reasonably stable?
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
Overall:
In response to a request at WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, I just completed a copy-edit of the article. I have several concerns:
1) The article seems to be written in a curious blend of American and British English:
It doesn't matter to me which style is used. Once a style is agreed upon, I'd be glad to make the necessary changes.
2) In the "Scotland" section under Angus cattle#History is the following sentence:
It's not clear which society is meant by "the society". I think it should be written out here.
3) In the second paragraph of the "United States" section of Angus cattle#History, we read:
But in the second paragraph of the lead, we read:
and in the middle of the first paragraph in Angus cattle#Characteristics, we read:
If there were "red and black animals" in 1885, how can we say "more recently red colours have emerged" and "in the middle of the 20th century a new strain of cattle called the Red Angus emerged"? If the red Angus cattle in the 20th century are a different type of cattle from the red cattle in 1885, this needs to be explained. Also, what does "more recently" mean?
4) In the first paragraph of Angus cattle#Genetic disorders, do you think "curly calf" and "water head" should be in italics while "Fawn Calf Syndrome" is both capitalized and in quotation marks?
5) In Angus cattle#Uses is the following sentence:
I wonder whether "adopt it into the mainstream" ought to be explained or re-worded so that the average reader will readily understand it.
6) In the last paragraph in the section Angus cattle#Commercial, we read:
However, there are not ten items in the list; there are eleven. Also, I noticed that some of the items seem to refer to the animal itself and some to the meat. I wonder if the list should be grouped. If not, O.K., but I draw your attention to the last item. It is not clear whether it refers to the animal or the meat.
7) The first two sentences in Angus cattle#Commercial are:
Clearly, these are out of chronological order, and, other than the word "however", it is not clear why they are out of chronological order or even why the need for "however". Corinne ( talk) 00:19, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
P.S. I was just looking at my edits in the Revision History, and I see that I somehow messed up an in-text reference. I thought I should change the single curly quotation mark to a regular straight quotation mark. Could someone fix this for me? Thanks. Corinne ( talk) 00:29, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
I have read through the talk page, article and breed societies, and there seems to be little consistency between the naming of this breed. Many countries refer to them as just "Angus", or "Black/Red Angus", however the UK-based and Irish societies refer to them as "Aberdeen-Angus", hyphenated.
Would it not make sense, given that the breed originated in Scotland, in the UK, that its name be listed as the name that is used by The Aberdeen-Angus Cattle Society? At the very least, the usage of Aberdeen-Angus throughout the article should be hyphenated.
Additionally, the remark that the breed is known by Aberdeen Angus in most parts of the world is not necessarily correct, as it appears that a very large number of breed societies refer to them as Angus, rather than Aberdeen-Angus. Slimestone ( talk) 14:07, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Could somebody please expand on King George's importation of cattle into America half a century after his death? 36.37.151.185 ( talk) 05:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)