Talk:Domestic turkey

Turkey Slaughter Methods

Today I saw the Sarah Palin interview in which turkeys were being slaughtered in the background. Is what I saw the typical method of turkey slaughter? I found a government publication on turkey slaughter[1] that described the process but it did not resemble what I saw in the video very well. Could someone who has information on this subject please add it to this article or link to an article with this information? The animal slaughter and slaughterhouse articles did not have much information regarding the slaughter of fowl. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.54.68.116 (talk) 22:32, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Another article with UK bias

There is no language in the statement that turkey is used in cold cuts on "Boxing Day" that indicates that this is a UK tradition/use only. First, what the hell is "Boxing Day?" Do you mean St. Stephen's Day perhaps? Second, if we are going to list turkey tradition by country, shouldn't it's use in the US for Thanksgiving be given pride of place as that is the most representative and iconic use of turkey?

What the hell is "St Stephen's day"?!

What's the evidence for domestics being descended from ocellated turkeys?

I don't know the history, but I got to say from appearences, domestics surely are more related to, if not directly descended from, wild turkeys than ocellateds. Wild turkeys have the same plumage pattern found in domestic turkeys(look up 'bronze' in domestics). --Kaalnek

I think you are right, so does Pheasants, Partridges and Grouse by Madge and McGowan, ISBN 0-7136-3966-0 - jimfbleak 16:28, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Is there any validity to the wive's tale that a domestic farm turkey will eat itself to death? I've never seen a turkey do it. 65.125.131.110 01:02, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Stuff that needs to be added

There is a lot of content missing that can be worked into the article fairly easy. For starters, stuff like the cool facts here: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/programs/AllAboutBirds/BirdGuide/Wild_Turkey_dtl.html

The above page also seems to imply that domesticated turkeys are considered a separate species from the other two, rather than just being a part of the Wild Turkey species. This would certainly make things easier in terms of classifying the Turkey articles - if you can find a definative source for this, please make the changes or write it here.

Also, there seems to still be some duplicitous content here and in the Turkey (bird) article, notably on the domestication stuff. I'm about done with my edits for now, but hopefully I got the ball rolling. Scott Ritchie 22:08, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

The Butchering section

Wikipedia is not a how-to guide (see Wikipedia:No Instruction, a proposed policy) and I am at a loss for what other material can really fill in. I know it's unwiki to wholesale delete material, but wouldn't this article be better without it? Bunchofgrapes 01:36, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

I see what you mean. I initially had a similar thought when I read that section (though I didn't know about the proposed policy you mention). Having said that, though, I must say that I personally found it interesting and rather liked having it in there. It's a nice example of the fascinating surprises that keep me coming back to Wikipedia. CKA3KA (Skazka) 02:04, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Bunchofgrapes. This should be in Wikibooks, not Wikipedia.Rob 13:21, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

I think its relevant for this section to be here as it provides information that some readers may find useful, but it certainly needs a bit of editing to make it look more encyclopedic. --Fizan 08:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I also think that it should be rewritten for tone. The information there is useful to an encyclopedia, as I feel the butchering process does deserve to be described, but it sohuldn't be worded as a how-to. Errick 12:22, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

You are right about the how-to guide wording, but to me it seems having this section reworded, rather than deleted, strengthens the article significantly... I would favor rewording over deletion, and in fact would like to see a little more information about industrial practices. -Corey

I think this section needs to removed, primarily because it reads like a copyright violation - I would be surprised if this was not a direct transcribe from some other place. The other arguments are also true: Butchering technique doesn't really belong in an encyclopedia entry, the section itself is written in an unencyclopedic style, it's completely uncited, and it doesn't have a lot to do with turkeys specifically (I've butchered a number of poultry species and it's pretty much the same for all of them). I'm going to give it a couple days to see if anyone re-writes it with citations, encyclopedic style, and a turkey-specific orientation. If not, I think it should come out. CredoFromStart 15:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, no one seemed to have an opinion on it, so I pulled it out. If you disagree, feel free to revert and drop me a line on my Talk Page CredoFromStart 17:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, if you want to take out the butchering section because it doesn't fit the rules or isn't cited or whatever, that's your prerogative, but it is *not* a copyright violation, and frankly I'm rather insulted at being accused of that. I learned how to butcher a turkey from a friend, came home and wrote it up so that I would remember how to do it, and decided to share it. But just for the record, it is all my own words, thank you very much. 71.209.16.227 00:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)slfisher

References

I removed the link to newsmax.com as it is rather more a polemic against American civilization than an informative piece on the wild turkey. I have replaced it with a link to a kids page I found using "all about turkeys" as a Google search. Paul Mitchell 20:19, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Turkey (Food)

I think Turkey (Food) should be it's own article and obviously link back to the domesticated turkey (and probably the wild turkey) article. A person looking for info on Turkey as a food, may not be all that interested in breeding, slaughtering ect. Turkey as a food item could include more indepth information on nutritional value, inclusing or exclusion in certain diets, ect. as well as the existing information listed under "Turkey as a food"

I agree... I came here looking for information about turkey as food. This article doesn't mention the chemical in turkey meat that makes you sleepy at all. (Drn8 (talk) 17:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC))

History

The reference for the June 5 revision by 67.103.18.251 doesn't really say if this dish is the official or unofficial national dish. I don't think that either of them improve the article, so I'd say that it could just red "widely regarded as the national dish" without anything about how official this might be.Bob98133 19:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

lead image

I replaced the lead image, as few good articles dealing with an animal utilize one that only shows the head profile of that animal. VanTucky ^(talk) 00:36, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

The lead image also appears on the Wild Turkey page labeled "Male mating display." It should be removed from one of these articles, depending on which type of turkey it actually is. I'm not a turkey expert so I don't know. El Mariachi (talk) 03:03, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Taxobox problem

The taxobox for this page seems to be for the genus, not the species, it lists two subspecies, both of which are wild. I think there must be a domesticus subspecies of Wild Turkey that should be the basis for this page, not the entire genus. Are any of the other species domesticated?--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 05:32, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Availability and commercial production

If your going to mention that in the UK Bernard Matthews is the best known turkey brand, then shouldnt you mention that Butterball is the best know in north america? Or, dont mention either in the interest of not being commercial. Also, the section about turkeys being intelligent doesnt sound like it meets criteria for neutrality, its just opinion. Any references for proof of intelligence in turkeys? 76.212.157.102 (talk) 09:26, 22 November 2007 (UTC) Sandy

External link to Cornell

The external link "More information on turkeys from Cornell" gives information on wild, not domestic, turkeys. Unfree (talk) 10:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

How big?

I was told by a man from Arkansas who was familiar with the poultry industry that the two largest poultry producers were in that state. One, I believe, was Perdue. He also said that turkeys weighing well over 100 pounds were raised there, though not sold in stores, and that they were kept in cramped conditions so they could never straighten their legs, in order to make their muscles bigger. Is it true? Unfree (talk) 10:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

"Aztecs"

The history section claims it was the Aztecs who domesticated the bird, however the article Domestication claims it took place around about 600 BCE; wheras, as the article History of the Aztecs notes, the Nahua only established themselves in Mexico in the 13th century CE. I'm assuming "Aztec" is being used as an ignorant catch-all term for any ancient Mexicans, so I'm going to go ahead and change it. --81.158.147.90 (talk) 15:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

10 years average lifespan? come off it!

The average lifespan for a domesticated turkey is 10 years.

What? By far the majority of domesticated turkeys won't reach 1 year as they're slaughtered for meat, this is unreferenced and frankly untrue unless somewhere there are turkeys living for thousands of years to buck the average. If it means the bird's natural lifespan in domestic conditions then it should say that with a reference —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.153.5 (talk) 17:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Possible connection

"Despite the name, turkeys have no relation to the country of Turkey and are native to North America". I have somewhere heard that there is a connection, that they reached Britain from merchants trading with Turkey. Certainly John Aubrey's Brief Lives quotes a verse going something like "something something, Turkey birds and beer/reached England all in one year". I have also somewhere heard that a Turkey's red wattle and head movements suggested a Turk in a fez praying, but that can't be true since the name goes back to when Turks wore turbans. PMLawrence (talk) 04:57, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

If you have a strong reliable, published source (hopefully multiple ones) to verify that fact, then by all means add it. Steven Walling (talk) 05:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

As I don't have the material to hand and can't recall where I came across it, I thought the proper course was to raise it on the talk page as an open question so anyone who came across it might have their memory jogged. PMLawrence (talk) 09:39, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Photo Caption NPOV

This is a fairly minor point, I understand, but should the caption above the main image really say genetically modified? Some may understand this to mean that the domestic turkey is the result of centuries of selective breeding and care by farmers, but that makes it a synonym to the definition of domesticated, as opposed to the "genetically modified" which many readers will interpret as genetically [i]engineered[/i].

While many larger commercial turkey farms use injections to "fatten" up the turkey or add certain chemicals to the feed, that still does not meet the criteria for the more inflammatory term since obviously, it applies to almost every domesticated animal people consume. I'm not modifying the caption since it will doubtless cause a flame war, but I thought I'd just pose the question. -71.249.71.36 (talk) 05:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)