This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cierrabeck, Mengyin Zhang.
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
As white meat is a main component of many individuals diets, and when looking up white meat on wikipedia, people might be interested in learning more about the dietary effects of white meat, and how this effects their health. I have been drafting a potential section addition, titled "module 6-final paragraphs" on my sandbox, linked at /info/en/?search=User:Cierrabeck/sandboxannotatedbib . I have included several academic sources for my writing, included and analyzed in the module 5 and module 4 sections. Please let me know your thoughts on the importance of this addition, and any comments and criticism you may have! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cierrabeck ( talk • contribs) 23:43, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
What about rabbit??? What about cat????? Remember me 16:33, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I've removed the assertion that pork is a white meat, because it contradicts our Red meat article. Whatever the final conclusion on this is, the two articles should agree. FreplySpang 15:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
I'ved moved the following statement here as it's not only poorly sourced but likely false:
The demarcation line shifted long ago! -- Amit 02:58, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
In your latest blanking of well-sourced content, you say "Please get a source that is not 18 years old". It would be nice if up-to-the-minute reference sources were available for everything, but the revision schedules of major reference works simply aren't on that sort of schedule, and frankly 18 years isn't that long a time anyway. Moreover, WP is based on sources. Simply because you believe the meaning has changed in the past 18 years doesn't mean that you can demand a source proving that it hasn't! I realize that the U.S. medical community has been trying to redefine "red meat" as meaning all animal meat, but I don't believe the gastronomic community agrees. What's more, WP tries to have a world-wide perspective; do you have good evidence of a change world-wide? But as a compromise solution, I will add the word "traditionally" to the sentence. That is non-committal about the current meaning while reflecting the well-documented meaning as recently as 18 years ago. Instead of blanking again, please discuss here first. -- Macrakis 18:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
References
The article currently says, "... domestic chicken and rabbit are invariably considered "white", while the meat of adult mammals, such as beef, mutton, and horse is invariably considered "red". Er, rabbits are mammals. Should this say "large mammals"? But then the pork controversy comes in. Any ideas on how to resolve this? FreplySpang 20:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
This article talk page was automatically added with {{ WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot ( talk) 11:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Right now we have in the intro in terms of the slow/fast twitch fibres of meat (not talking about white/red) we have white/light versus dark.
This got me thinking. The opposite of 'white' would technically be 'black' but we don't use black I guess because that makes you think of burnt meat. Plus I've never seen dark meat that's literally dark enough to be black whereas the meat does look rather pure white when it's lighter.
One thing I was wondering was, as opposed to "light" meat, has it ever been called "pale" meat? Maybe that's a bad choice because pale may imply that there's some kind of pallour but I think that pale is an apt an antonym to dark as light is. Nym ( talk) 15:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
In November 2012, the line stating that the fields of biology, husbandry, and a couple others all agree (blank) was labeled as needing a citation. It's November 2015, and there's still no citation. I deleted the line, and rewrote in more neutral voice. I used the citation on the topic used in the [Red Meat] article. -Laced 96.41.75.84 ( talk) 10:39, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cierrabeck, Mengyin Zhang.
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
As white meat is a main component of many individuals diets, and when looking up white meat on wikipedia, people might be interested in learning more about the dietary effects of white meat, and how this effects their health. I have been drafting a potential section addition, titled "module 6-final paragraphs" on my sandbox, linked at /info/en/?search=User:Cierrabeck/sandboxannotatedbib . I have included several academic sources for my writing, included and analyzed in the module 5 and module 4 sections. Please let me know your thoughts on the importance of this addition, and any comments and criticism you may have! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cierrabeck ( talk • contribs) 23:43, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
What about rabbit??? What about cat????? Remember me 16:33, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I've removed the assertion that pork is a white meat, because it contradicts our Red meat article. Whatever the final conclusion on this is, the two articles should agree. FreplySpang 15:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
I'ved moved the following statement here as it's not only poorly sourced but likely false:
The demarcation line shifted long ago! -- Amit 02:58, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
In your latest blanking of well-sourced content, you say "Please get a source that is not 18 years old". It would be nice if up-to-the-minute reference sources were available for everything, but the revision schedules of major reference works simply aren't on that sort of schedule, and frankly 18 years isn't that long a time anyway. Moreover, WP is based on sources. Simply because you believe the meaning has changed in the past 18 years doesn't mean that you can demand a source proving that it hasn't! I realize that the U.S. medical community has been trying to redefine "red meat" as meaning all animal meat, but I don't believe the gastronomic community agrees. What's more, WP tries to have a world-wide perspective; do you have good evidence of a change world-wide? But as a compromise solution, I will add the word "traditionally" to the sentence. That is non-committal about the current meaning while reflecting the well-documented meaning as recently as 18 years ago. Instead of blanking again, please discuss here first. -- Macrakis 18:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
References
The article currently says, "... domestic chicken and rabbit are invariably considered "white", while the meat of adult mammals, such as beef, mutton, and horse is invariably considered "red". Er, rabbits are mammals. Should this say "large mammals"? But then the pork controversy comes in. Any ideas on how to resolve this? FreplySpang 20:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
This article talk page was automatically added with {{ WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot ( talk) 11:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Right now we have in the intro in terms of the slow/fast twitch fibres of meat (not talking about white/red) we have white/light versus dark.
This got me thinking. The opposite of 'white' would technically be 'black' but we don't use black I guess because that makes you think of burnt meat. Plus I've never seen dark meat that's literally dark enough to be black whereas the meat does look rather pure white when it's lighter.
One thing I was wondering was, as opposed to "light" meat, has it ever been called "pale" meat? Maybe that's a bad choice because pale may imply that there's some kind of pallour but I think that pale is an apt an antonym to dark as light is. Nym ( talk) 15:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
In November 2012, the line stating that the fields of biology, husbandry, and a couple others all agree (blank) was labeled as needing a citation. It's November 2015, and there's still no citation. I deleted the line, and rewrote in more neutral voice. I used the citation on the topic used in the [Red Meat] article. -Laced 96.41.75.84 ( talk) 10:39, 21 November 2015 (UTC)