Talk:Running of the Bulls
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Because the festival at San Fermin is an instance of an encierro, I thought an entry of its own was deserved. Hence I have made a first stab at it. I hope others may also be able to add information about encierros held outside of Spain. Gsd2000 23:45, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
- 1 Literal meaning
- 2 San Fermin vs Encierros in general / Injuries and Deaths
- 3 el encierro
- 4 Why do they do this?
- 5 isn't this plagiarism??
- 6 Article name
- 7 Animal rights concerns / controversy
- 8 Examples
- 9 Popular Culture
- 10 when was the first running of the bulls?
- 11 deaths
- 12 List of dead runners
- 13 Famous People to attend the running of the Bulls
- 14 Anyone can run?
- 15 What happens to the bulls afterwards?
- 16 Illegal
We need a literal meaning for "el encierro." Badagnani 20:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
I once saw a picture where some people were jumping into a river or lake to escape some oncoming bulls. Is there an encierro where this frequently happens, and if so, where?
- I would say that it is an extremely common occurrence. Most Spanish towns and villages have fountains in their centres and the centres are invariably where the bulls run. I've seen it meself... Gsd2000 00:15, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
San Fermin vs Encierros in general / Injuries and Deaths
This article is about the activity that is the encierro. The bull runs in Pamplona may be the ones that non-Spanish hear about, but they are just one of hundreds that go on every year. I removed the "injuries and deaths" paragraph because it related to the San Fermin bull run (which already has these stats), and did not relate to total global deaths and injuries in bullruns worldwide. Gsd2000 03:01, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I believe el encierro means "the confinement" in spanish literally. there might be other ways also, and the phrase should be reworded to not say el encierro means running of the bulls. Propain 23:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC),
Why do they do this?
I'm surprised that this page doesn't give a reason for this tradition given that it seems rather insane to me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 05:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC).
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 23:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
isn't this plagiarism??
text within this article is taken directly from http://www.sanfermin.com/2006/guia.php?lang=eng . sup with that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 01:25, 22 January 2007 (UTC).
This doesn't seem like the most appropriate name. On es.wikipedia.org, sure, but not here. Wikipedia:Naming conventions suggests using the most common name in in English. Using google, even the highly restrictive phrase (which would reject some results) "running of the bulls" yields 233,000 results in English. Using only the single term "Encierro" yields 53,100 results in English, though many of these, at least on the first page, appear to be mirror sites and/or include "bull run" or "running of the bulls".
Aside from google, the term is not common in English or even widely known. Washingtonpost.com shows 5 results, while "Running of the bulls" shows 74 results since 1987. The Chicago Sun-Times shows NO RESULTS for "Encierro" and 77 results (copy and paste the following uncooperative link: http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=CSTB&p_theme=cstb&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&s_dispstring=("Running%20of%20the%20bulls")%20AND%20date(all)&p_field_advanced-0=&p_text_advanced-0=("Running%20of%20the%20bulls")&xcal_numdocs=20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=_rank_:D&xcal_ranksort=4&xcal_useweights=yes ) for "Running of the Bulls".
Most people in the English-speaking world do not likely even know the term "El Encierro", and certainly very few would search for that term on Wikipedia. Even the external links on this page primarily say "Running of the Bulls". Since this article does not refer to one specific event, but to a country-wide phenomenon, the most common name in English should be used. Ufwuct 23:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
There are those who contend that the title, "Running of the bulls" is a misnomer with the emphasis improperly placed on the minority animal. Perhaps this event and others like it would be more appropriately named as, "Running of the fools".Windmaker2 16:11, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Animal rights concerns / controversy
I miss a section regarding animal rights concerns; I'm not an expert on this issue (hence I feel I can not add it myself) yet I've heard stories about 'preparation of the bulls' to include covering their eyes with vaseline and dehydrating them for several days to ensure a safer trip for locals and the many tourists that are participating in these events. I'm unable to assess whether this is animal-rights propaganda or a true present day practise. 22.214.171.124 16:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I have heard similar stories but a quick web search didn't turn up any documentation. I also came across claims of electric shocks and drugs being used. I think if these can be documented that it should be included, but I'm not sure animal rights concerns would be the right heading since I think animal rights view would just be to not use the bulls. Maybe Animal Welfare Concerns would be an OK sub-head? If I find documentation, I'll post the proposed change here first for review.Bob98133 19:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Is the example regarding a bull being floated along and then killed with lances relevant? Earlier in the article, it is mentioned that any violence is forbidden, so killing with lances is bull-fighting, not bull-running. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 15:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC).
Shouldn't there be a section of references to this insane activity in popular culture, such as the commercial that Nike did with the members of the Denver Broncos' offensive line getting into a three point stance and then taking the bulls head on?
- It looks like the "In Other Media" section is going to be a magnet for junk. While the Hemmingway novels and the Louis Lumiere movie make sense to include, a whole bunch of references to Family Guy or Jackass in which a bull run, or something like it, may have appeared is the sort of thing we'll pull later, so why not ditch those almost irrelevant entries now? Bob98133 (talk) 14:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
when was the first running of the bulls?
Does anyone know?
The article says it developed from moving the bulls to the ring for the bullfights; is the time of evolution of the encierro as debated as that of bullfighting, or is there documentation for its beginning?Ingeborg Ulfsdottyr (talk) 23:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I mean no disrespect but have removed the mention of the American tourist killed in 1995. it was out of place, being remarkable solely due to his nationallity. A mention of the most recent death is appropriate, not simply one out of 15 considered "more important" for being American. --Brideshead (talk) 22:37, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
I've also taken out the "popular culture/trivia" sections, worked the notable examples into the body of the article and deleted the ever present reference to Family Guy. i love Family Guy as much as anyone but every single article does not need to have a reference to a Family Guy episode. --Brideshead (talk) 22:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- I mostly agree with your editions, however one possible reason to leave the tourist death in 1995 could be that it was the last people to be killed by the horns. (the last person was due to a head concussion). I'm from Pamplona, so I don't really care about the nationality (I even thought he was australian), but most people here remembers the death.--Garrondo (talk) 07:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I read in a national (Swedish) newspaper that the most recent death was in 2008, updating deathtoll from 15 to 16 and removing the American tourist reference, as he/she is no longer the most recent kill. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 13:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
This year death in sanfermin was a tourist who fell from a wall, but it was not during the running of the bulls but while he was sleeping in a garden, so it is not relevant. However last death was Fermín Etxeberria Iraneta wich fell during the running below the bulls and died of head trauma.--Garrondo (talk) 11:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
List of dead runners
As I said in my editing summary, this list would be better on the Darwin Award page. I can see that it might be relevant to mention the first death or the most recent death, but listing them all is stupid. Why not list everyone who died when their parachute didn't open on the parachuting page? Getting trampled or gored by a bull while intentionally running in front of it is not worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedic article, except one about clumsiness or stupidity. Bob98133 (talk) 13:39, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- First of all: Take it easy... :-) Things are never black or white. My reasons for inclusion are the following: First of all they are not hundreds, but 14 so there is not a problem of space, while the fact that they are so few gives them some kind of notability. At the same time is not so much of interest their names while the other facts of the table: the year of each death could be of interest to see if the number of deaths has grown or decreased, while the origin and age of the person gives a good idea of the characteristics of runners and the section of the running may indicate which part is most dangerous. Finally such list is perfectly referenced, so it should be discussed if it has to be eliminated. The references are from the press association of Pamplona and the council of the same city, and the fact that both organisations put it in their pages abut the running implies that they feel it is notable to include it. I believe these are reasons that back up both the notability and encyclopedicy of the table enough to maintain it. Nevertheless lets see if other editors give their opinion.
- Thanks, Garrondo. I wasn't questioning at all that this is well-referenced and thanks for doing that work. It just doesn't make any sense to include it in the article. For example, the Golden Gate Bridge article mentions in detail that people commit suicide from the bridge, but it doesn't list each one by name, age, sex, nationality, day of the week or any other way. The only thing notable about the list of those who died at the Running of the Bulls is that they were slower than the bulls or clumsier or more unlucky than the other runners, none of which are notable. The list does not reveal any other intersting demographic. It's fine that these deaths are reported in detail on a website devoted to Pamplona, but not in an encyclopedia article. Bob98133 (talk) 14:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- I simply do not agree for the reasons I stated. Lets leave it for a few days and see if other people give their opinion and discuss the appropiateness of its inclusion again (lets say for example a week?). Regarding the reference you just have added on danger for bulls: I have left it for the moment, but a better ref should be found since it does not explicitely say its dangerous for bulls and a case of falling does not give the rule that it is dangerous. I seem to remember that a few years ago a bull broke its neck when he hit a wall, but I am not sure if it was during the run... maybe something like that could serve better.--Garrondo (talk) 14:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Only as a personal comment: I am from Pamplona and some of my friends run (I do not but I like to see it). Running is no more stupid than parachuting: both are obviously dangerous and people do it for the adrenaline. Normally nothing goes wrong but both runners and parachuters know that they are endangering their life. :-)--Garrondo (talk) 14:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I agree they are both dangerous, however: Each year in the U.S. about 35 people die while making approximately 2 million parachute jumps.. I know it would be original research, but that is about 1 in 57,000. I think the odds of being injured while running with the bulls is higher than that. As well, the risk of being injured is an integral part of the bull run, while it is a lesser part of parachuting. I agree, let's leave it and see if there's other comments, along with the danger to bulls. Bob98133 (talk) 15:12, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- You didn't need the ref for the parachute figure :-), I would have believed you. Ok, I know the danger is different... but the essence is similar (what's the point of jumping from a plane with nothing else but a blanket to protect you from smashing to the ground?). (Lets say I would rather jump that run). This is also OR, but taking say for example last 20 years (I don't know figures on participation before that) every day aproximately 2000 people run. That is 20.000 people during the festival and 400.000 in the last 20 years with only 2 deaths: odds are 1 for every 200.000 runners. Probably not so easy to get killed as you tought :-P. Injuries really don't count (How many people break their ankle or bruise their arms parachuting every year?: Probably quite a lot and are not even registered.--Garrondo (talk) 07:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Famous People to attend the running of the Bulls
- Fine to ask, but even if there are some, I don't see how including them in the article would improve the article. Bob98133 (talk) 13:34, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Anyone can run?
Is that true?
That didn't use to be the case in Pamplona. There were guys there whose job it was to shoo any girls off the course before the race.
Because the Pamplona race is for men only. Why would girls be participating in a dangerous manhood ritual?
Varlaam (talk) 01:45, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
What happens to the bulls afterwards?
historically Farmers advocated avoidance of injury because any injured family member could not help support the farm and yet the town would still support them. injury could cause real devistation not only to the injured but others. ie, the farmer's expression "keep your feet on the ground"
in books there was allot of danger and devistation glorified: that was fiction, in reality farmers condemned injury.
who pays for bull injuries? the town? if it falls on the head of unpaid people being injured and the town does not support well: screw you. if not, sorry i mentioned it!
do not bring this trash to USA "The Great Bull Run" Atlanta GA unless it is well insured.
i'm already sue the organizers (which has been done successfully in the usa legal system many times before)
"the rich need poor courts" -- jdh