| Revision as of 01:16, 5 September 2013 editPumpkinSky (talk | contribs)20,866 edits →Soap content: per mtbw← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:38, 5 September 2013 edit undoBjenks (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers13,788 edits →Soap content: Keeping one advt, per MoS guidelinesNext edit → | ||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
| :Well duh! The Budweiser Clydesdales themselves are kept, trained, and travel to advertise beer! The whole article is about a commercial enterprise to promote beer but inthe process, also breed some truly high-quality animals. Get a grip, please. The commercials are examples of the uses of these animals, but obviously cannot be used on wiki. ]<sup>]</sup> 00:20, 5 September 2013 (UTC) | :Well duh! The Budweiser Clydesdales themselves are kept, trained, and travel to advertise beer! The whole article is about a commercial enterprise to promote beer but inthe process, also breed some truly high-quality animals. Get a grip, please. The commercials are examples of the uses of these animals, but obviously cannot be used on wiki. ]<sup>]</sup> 00:20, 5 September 2013 (UTC) | ||
| ::Per MTBW. That's what this group of horses are, an ad gimmick for beer. We can't use the actual commercials, but you these horse ARE wiki notable and you can't talk about them without talking about Budweiser Beer. ] ] 01:16, 5 September 2013 (UTC) | ::Per MTBW. That's what this group of horses are, an ad gimmick for beer. We can't use the actual commercials, but you these horse ARE wiki notable and you can't talk about them without talking about Budweiser Beer. ] ] 01:16, 5 September 2013 (UTC) | ||
| :::Is it agreed—"obviously cannot be used on wiki"? Then I propose removing all but one, per the MoS guidelines on ], ] and ]. I think the one to keep is the 9/11 one, which shows the horses off well with minimal advertising content. ] (]) 02:38, 5 September 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:38, 5 September 2013
 | Equine B‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | A fact from Budweiser Clydesdales appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 June 2008, and was viewed approximately 7,800 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Tossed merge tag, references to the Budweiser Clydesdales are already in the other article to the extent article consensus will allow. (Which is to say, very little--there have been edit wars over this issue there, believe it or not) This hitch is independently notable and the article would be better off being expanded. Montanabw 06:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Origin
When visiting this excellent place some years ago, i'm pretty sure that i read in here that the Clydesdale team was originally from the Genesee Brewing Company, and bought by A-B for Budweiser around the middle or end of WWI. Obviously this does not correlate with this article; does anyone have any information on this? I'd go and verify from the Museum, but i don't live here any more, having moved. Cheers, Lindsay 12:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
- Source for end of prohibition intro came from the Anheuser-Busch site, but it's possible they got the idea from elsewhere, they probably weren't the first brewery to use Clydes as a promotional team... do some digging if you'd like, be interesting. Montanabw 03:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- Anheuser-Busch's own website is not the best source for information. Nor is the Busch Gardens site. Please use other references where possible. -Freekee (talk) 05:35, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
- In the world of WP:V, there are times a site dedicated to the topic is a good source, other times it is potentially biased. This simply means that one must seek the best available sources. However, in this case, the web sites for the company ARE probably the best sources for statistical information such as how many animals are at their farms, how animals make the hitch, the qualifications for the hitch, etc. The history section can undoubtably be enhanced by additional sources, but as far as when the company itself premiered the hitch and what they did with it, the company source is apt to be reasonably authoritative as far as it goes. I certainly think that if people can find additional sources that are accurate and verifiable, that would certainly improve the article. However, there is no need to throw out existing sources just because they are company sources. Anyone want to do more research and such is great with me. Montanabw 17:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Commercials
Are the YouTube links to commercials featuring the Budweiser Clydesdales really necessary? I seem to recall that Misplaced Pages eschews YouTube links unless they're absolutely integral to the article. --MicahBrwn (talk) 17:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- LOL! Maybe not absolutely necessary, (grin) but I think helpful. In general, wiki's policy suggests that external links are appropriate for things that can't be placed on wiki due to copyright restrictions, which I am sure there are here, and we really do need at least a few commercials as examples, as after all, it's the TV thing that made them famous. I'm not a huge fan of YouTube in general, but I had trouble finding anything better (some other sites, but iffy downloads, not compatible in all viewers, etc...). If we could find a link to, say, a link within Anheuser-Busch's web site with many of these commercials, particularly the original one, I agree that would be better than YouTube. But I'd sure like to keep the most of them, and in the meantime, I feel they do no harm. Besides, I bet you watched them, didn't you? (LOL!) Montanabw 21:16, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Well, according to Misplaced Pages:YOUTUBE, the acceptability of linking to YouTube videos are to be determined on a case-by-case basis. And judging by the criteria used, it seems to be appropriate. Still, I don't think every single one of those ads are necessary for inclusion. Two or three super-notable ads (like the one with the zebra as a referee), sure … but not all of them. Just IMHO. --MicahBrwn (talk) 08:35, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, but we haven't linked ALL of them by any means! LOL! There were three different ones just in the 2009 Super Bowl! LOL! I suppose we really don't need the streaker one...but it's so goofy! (grin) Montanabw 20:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
I don't feel that a list of every Super Bowl commercial that can be found on YouTube qualifies as a proper set of external links. Per WP:YOUTUBE, while it's not a deal-breaker that it's from YouTube, 1. those links may technically violate copyright, 2. they could be pulled at any time, and 3. while having a few of them might be illustrative (e.g., the "original" one), a mass linkage to YouTube does NOT satisfy WP:EL. umrguy42 17:03, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
- Also, "it's so goofy" is NOT a reason for inclusion, sorry. umrguy42 17:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
- Well, "a few might be illustrative" works for me. A bit of narrowing might be fine. As I noted before, there is not "every" ad up there even now. It's a representative sample. The original "here comes the King" one needs to stay, some of the more unique concepts should remain, (The non-Superbowl ones, maybe concepts going from hitch commercials to animal actor ones -- i.e. keep the zebra, lose the donkey? The use of the foals, perhaps, etc.) and one or two recent ones need to stay. I used the criteria "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Misplaced Pages article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks), or other reasons." Here, the "other reasons" include detail, copyright, and relevance -- they illustrate the way they are best known to the most people (I've seen the live hitch maybe twice in my life?) and also YouTube is needed because Anheuser-Busch has not chosen to archive them anywhere that I can find. Montanabw 19:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
new photo
I just uploaded this photo: File:Budweiser-team aug2009.jpg, in case anyone thinks it would be a good addition to the article. -Freekee (talk) 05:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
- NICE photo! Thanks for the tip! Montanabw 17:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Do they still haul beer?
Do the crates in the wagons have bottles of beer or are they empty? Bizzybody (talk) 07:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
- Good question, I suppose their web site would have an FAQ with that information. If you find out, do pop the link in here, it's interesting detail. Montanabw 19:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
- I don't have a link, but I've heard that they do carry crates full of beer to actually give enough weight (that full hitch could easily take off with just an empty wagon). umrguy42 17:03, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
More sources
Some stuff from 2013 discussing the farms and upbringing of the Clydes:
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PU92XeqhRSA
- http://www.kvoa.com/news/budweiser-s-super-bowl-ad-shows-new-clydesdale-foal/
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Vmh9kybZEY ABC story
Problems with the article
In one place, the articles states there are 3 traveling teams. Elsewhere it's stated that there are 5 teams. There's also two different lists of home locations. Would be nice if this could be clarified. Thanks. --208.14.216.12 (talk) 21:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- Check the citations, if you see where the correction can be made, go ahead and fix it - and clean up the cite, if needed. The corporate changes have made the article outdated in a couple spots, it's been tweaked, but I don't have the time to work on this article I once did, so fixing any other errors is always useful. Montanabw 19:11, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for catching this. The herd has been downsized since AB sold Busch Gardens. The references that refer to Busch Gardens are no longer valid. I removed the most obvious offending material. Americasroof (talk) 00:27, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
- It's better to tag it and fix it than to just dump it, updating is work, but we are all in it together! Montanabw 21:28, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
- I see you restored the inaccuracies. I earlier edited it to update the reduction in herd. The reference before I updated it was from Busch Gardens which Busch hasn't owned for some time and so the Budweiser Clydesdales are not there. What I deleted was superfluous. I haven't taken information out other than what was inaccurate and will never be accurate.Americasroof (talk) 04:01, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- I restored - but with TAGS - we need to update the number of hitches, their headquarters locations, etc... not just dump this important material. In your earlier edit, you threw out citations and didn't replace them. I'm not disputing that you are probably right, but we need sources and verification Go do some research and back up your changes with cited material. I'm good with improving the article, but not by removing important information and not having citations to back up the statements made, that's all. Montanabw 20:35, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- I guess by your argument it's best to keep inaccurate and unreferenced material in an article long after it's clearly defined as wrong. The references I removed are no longer valid because of a company change. The material I removed is not substantive to the article and I would rather have an accurate article rather than restoring things to the way we wish they could be. I'm from Missouri. I wish AB still had its world headquarters there and had its considerable empire but times have changed. The article after your restorations is flat wrong and inconsistent. Why are you telling me to find the references to support your inaccurate edits? If you strongly believe your edits are correct then YOU find the references. If YOU can't find the references the material should be deleted.Americasroof (talk) 03:32, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- Because of WP:BURDEN -- the person who wants the changes has the burden of finding a way to do so that is acceptable. Tags flag material to be fixed. Then someone is supposed to fix it. Just removing things without a good faith effort to replace the source material is, IMHO, lazy. Don't get upset about this, I have 3000 articles on my watchlist, am actively writing a new article in my sandbox, am upgrading another to GA with a team of editors, and have other fish to fry. Montanabw 00:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
- BTW I see you have made a good faith effort to find the references. The bottom line is that they are now in three different locations across the country. However the Missouri situation is a little complicated. More than half the total herd is at Boonville. However, there are some Grant's Farm in St. Louis and a hitch at the St. Louis brewery itself. The other herds are based at Fort Collins, Colorado and Merrimack, New Hampshire. There's no reference to any other herds including Texas. InBev has considerably reduced and consolidated AB operations.Americasroof (talk) 11:26, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- WP:SOFIXIT -- properly. Find the sources and put them in. You clearly know this material, so finding a source to back it up should be pretty easy. Montanabw 00:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Soap content
I checked out two external-link websites which were not marked as commercial--and they were both pushing the beer brand! That makes 12 out of 12 commercials. Not really what Misplaced Pages is all about. Lovely images in some of them, but still blatant advertising, no worthwhile information. I recommend ditching the whole section. What do others think? Bjenks (talk) 01:22, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- Well duh! The Budweiser Clydesdales themselves are kept, trained, and travel to advertise beer! The whole article is about a commercial enterprise to promote beer but inthe process, also breed some truly high-quality animals. Get a grip, please. The commercials are examples of the uses of these animals, but obviously cannot be used on wiki. Montanabw 00:20, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- Per MTBW. That's what this group of horses are, an ad gimmick for beer. We can't use the actual commercials, but you these horse ARE wiki notable and you can't talk about them without talking about Budweiser Beer. PumpkinSky talk 01:16, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- Is it agreed—"obviously cannot be used on wiki"? Then I propose removing all but one, per the MoS guidelines on advertising, collections of external links and Minimizing the number of links. I think the one to keep is the 9/11 one, which shows the horses off well with minimal advertising content. Bjenks (talk) 02:38, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- Per MTBW. That's what this group of horses are, an ad gimmick for beer. We can't use the actual commercials, but you these horse ARE wiki notable and you can't talk about them without talking about Budweiser Beer. PumpkinSky talk 01:16, 5 September 2013 (UTC)