Talk:Bullfighting/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Errors in Portuguese Section

Errors exist with these two statements:

• in Portugal, the main stars of bullfighting are the riders, as opposed to Spain, where the matadores are the most prominent bullfighters
• In Portugal, bulls have their horns severed in a way that they do not present sharp points.

The article states that "in Portugal, the main stars of bullfighting are the riders, as opposed to Spain, where the matadores are the most prominent bullfighters". This is incorrect. The riders are the main attraction in a corrida that is done with one or two horses/riders. This is also the most popular of the "two-types" of bullfights in Portugal. However, Portugal also has bullfights that are not done with the horse. In these bullfights, the matador is the prominent figure.

Confusion may come from the fact that in a "horse-style" tourada, assistants are available. These assistants are paid by, and work for, the horse rider. These assistants are known as bandalheiros (not sure of the spelling). They do carry capes to guide the bull, but they are not matadors.

Additionally, the article states that in Portugal the bull's horns are cut. In a "horse-style" bullfight, the horns are covered to prevent injury to the horse and to the Forcados. Forcados are the men that must bring the charging bull to a stop and therefore come in direct contact with the horns. They only perform with bulls that are fought by horse. Bulls that are fought by foot do not have their horns capped are not stopped by the Forcados.

These "non-horse-style" bullfights are what people typically think of when they speak of bullfighting. These are performed by a matador. During these bullfights, the matador is the prominent figure (obviously, because there is no horse).

The two styles of bullfighting may be mixed, it is then referred to as a tourada mista, with some bulls being fought by horsemen and the others by matadors. However, each bull cannot be shared by a horseman and a matador.

In Portugal, the "horse-style" bullfights may be more popular because the matador (which means killer) does not have the authority to kill the bull. It may also be because the crowds enjoy the Forcados, which cannot participate in a "foot-style" bullfight because of the sharp horns. Regardless of the reason, Portugal does have more "horse-style" bullfights than "foot-style", which may be the reason that this was written up incorrectly. I plan to amend the section when I have a chance.

--Januario 23:43, Jun 11, 2004 (UTC)

"English-speaking critics often confuse the tauromachia with the coarse entertainment of "bull-baiting" formerly popular in Britain, in which packs of specially-bred bulldogs were loosed upon a bull confined within a ring or even tethered to a stake."

Is this really accurate? I'm speaking only from personal experience here, but the standard image of bull-fighting focuses around the matador and the bull, and few ever even think of bull baiting. I'm not sure I've ever heard of the two being confused. --Xanzzibar 19:48, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

---

Red hats

(I've moved the following question by an anon from Image talk:Suerte de banderillas.jpg, where it was originally posted. -- ChrisO 16:23, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC) )

hi I wonna ask one question Why bullfighters wear red hat?

IIRC only portuguese "forcados" wear a red hat (the traditional portuguese headdress). The standard hat for on-foot bullfighting is called a "montera" and it's always black. It's, though, usually lined on the inside in crimson. It's a common superstition not to let it bottom-up (with the inside visible) on the arena because it "looks like a coffin ..."

My Compliments

A darn fine page. It makes me proud to be a Wiki. (Didn't I catch a bullfightin Brazil once? I was drunk, and may have been in Argentina.) Paul, in Saudi 17:15, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

POV Wording

It is apparent to me that this article has drastic point of view wording in the pro; the words 'pain', 'torment', 'cruelty', 'suffering' and 'torture' to name just a few are all jammed down in the criticisms section only. There is no possible argument that these are NPOV words to describe the act of ritualistic maiming and (eventual) slaying of an animal. The only instance of the word 'suffering' that isn't in the criticisms section is in relation to the matador suffering a gorging from the bull.

Cultural egg-shell treading must be put aside for accurate, realistic and neutral point of view editing of this article, I think personally that we all, as Wikipedians, are having ourselves on by being hypersensitive and keeping anything factual, that could be percieved as criticism, jammed in the criticism subheading only. Thus I have placed the NPOV boilerplate on the main article until this issue can be addressed. Jachin 18:15, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I have trouble understanding your point of view. The fact that the article does not condemn bullfighting makes it pro? It is your opinion and your point of view that bullfighting is "cruel" and a "torture". Many disagree. So I would suggest that you keep your point of view out of the article. It's perfectly NPOV, reflecting pro and con arguments in their respective sections. LeoDV 14:47, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

BJAODN

I think that the WP:BJAODN version of the introduction is actually better. It creates a greater sense of involement for the reader. Of course, that's my opinion. ~ Syrae Faileas - «Talk» 21:55, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Request for references

Hi, I am working to encourage implementation of the goals of the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy. Part of that is to make sure articles cite their sources. This is particularly important for featured articles, since they are a prominent part of Wikipedia. The Fact and Reference Check Project has more information. Thank you, and please leave me a message when a few references have been added to the article. - Taxman 18:51, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

I've removed this:

"It is said that the King of Spain, Juan Carlos, has once told in the midst of the European Union process of congregation, in face of great pressure from other European royals, to stop what was considered a cruel bloody business, that: "Spain would rather leave the European Union than to abolish bullfighting"."

It would be needed a reference maintain that. I live in Spain and I'm agains bullfighting but I've never heard that statement. Anyway, the King has no power making laws in Spain so it doesn depend on him, and it's just one more opinion.

84.122.6.175 01:13, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

The King is a great fan of bullfighting, this is true. While he has no power to make laws, in many regions of Spain there is considerable support for bullfighting. In Andalusia, Castile, Extremadura and Valencia interest in bullfighting remains high. The Canary Islands banned bullfighting in the 1990s but it was not a part of their culture, as is the case with Catalonia, and likewise I would expect bullfighting to disappear in the Baleares at some point in time. I would not consider a national ban to be feasible but with the decentralization process which has occurred in Spain since the return to democracy and the resulting power of the autonomous communities, I would expect bullfighting to completely disappear in some communities while in others it will continue to thrive. Also, the article did not address the fact that in Spain it is considered a cultural event along the lines of opera or ballet, not a sport. Bullfights are covered in the cultural sections of newspaper, not the sports sections.

I'd say your argument is moot on the grounds that dog fighting was also a 'cultural event' of numerous nations prior to the 1900's and in some instances of more well educated and refined cultures the 1800's. A complete ban on bullfighting will eventually occur as the practise of torturing and killing animals, for entertainment, under the guise of culture or not, is an affront to human decency and common sense to the rest of the world.

The argument that it is the countries right to see things differently is moot on the grounds that numerous countries saw it as their right to allow slavery and other animalistic behaviour, yet eventually they gave in to reason and common decency as human beings. Jachin 17:38, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Can anyone give a source for the number of 6000 horses killed or wounded? I live in Spain, and a horse killed is something exceptional. And wounds (if you mean horn wounds) are also uncommon. I daresay that dropping a couple of zeros would still be exaggerated.--JoseFMartindelPozo 19:48, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Intelligence

In "characteristic combination of intelligence, strength and attack-proneness", it may not be clear that the desired intelligence is not very high. A smart bull would not attack blindly but would check at the last moment the real position of the bullfighter. (I was told that cows don't attack blindly, that's way there are no cows in bullrings). Samewise, the strength and attack-proneness have to be limited. Too much and the bullfighter can't work. Too few and the show is just butchering. There is also the difference between torerist and bullist audiences.

How could it be expressed more clearly? --Error 23:27, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

A 1931 viewpoint

Origen europeo, liberal y antiespañol de las corridas de toros, a diatribe from 1931 by Ernesto Giménez Caballero in the pre-Falangist organ La Conquista del Estado. --Error 02:00, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

That's rather interesting considering that Gimenéz Caballero was not only from Cadiz, a part of Spain in which antibullfighting sentiment is virtually unknown even today, but was a man of the extreme right. The overwhelming majority of Spaniards who are opposed to bullfighting are from areas in which there is little interest in bullfighting and are on the left end of the political spectrum. An Andalusian right winger opposed to bullfighting is quite atypical. There was concern for the welfare of animals involved in bullfighting in Spain during the 1920s, but it invariably advocated measures to protect horses rather than banning corridas. The custom of padding worn by horses in the bullfight dates from that era, according to Hemingway's "Death In The Afternoon"

Cavaleiro

I changed the "rejoneo" to Caveleiro. In Portuguese style bullfights, the bullfighters/ horsemen/ horse riders are formally known as the "Cavaleiro". Spanish style would be called a "rejoneo". Here in California, the bloodless bullfights are a seasonal event that begins between the months of April through October. And I also want to clarify that the horses are NOT beaten or abused to get them to do what they do. At least our horses are not. Just like with any animals, it is the "owners" responsibility to make sure that the animals are not harmed in any way. I read somewhere on the internet that the horses are tortured to get them to do tricks and go up against a bull. And I'm simply saying that it is NOT true at all.--Webmistress Diva 20:01, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Here's the official statute law for bullfighting in California...

resource: Bullfighting Statute/Law

Citation: Cal Pen Code §597m

Summary: This statute makes it unlawful for any person to promote, advertise, stage, hold, manage, conduct, participate in, engage in, or carry on any bullfight, but does not prohibit rodeos or bloodless bullfights, contests, or exhibitions held in connection with religious celebrations or religious festivals.

Statute in Full: It shall be unlawful for any person to promote, advertise, stage, hold, manage, conduct, participate in, engage in, or carry on any bullfight exhibition, any bloodless bullfight contest or exhibition, or any similar contest or exhibition, whether for amusement or gain or otherwise; provided, that nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit rodeos or to prohibit measures necessary to the safety of participants at rodeos. This section shall not, however, be construed as prohibiting bloodless bullfights, contests, or exhibitions held in connection with religious celebrations or religious festivals. Any person violating the provisions of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.

--Webmistress Diva 12:49, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The link does not include legislative history, so it is uncertain at what time bullfighting was banned in California. There was a brief Los Angeles Times article about bullfighting in 19th century Los Angeles and its popularity at the time which is not available on the web. I get the impression that California banned bullfights some time in the 19th century, and that New Mexico and Arizona allowed bullfights into the early 20th century. This information would be appreciated.

Pictures

The pictures are currently (mostly) stacked at the top of the article. I think it would be better to arrange them around more, so space it out and avoid further clipping. I don't really have the time at the moment, but if no one else tries, I'm going to give it a shot. --Falcorian ^(talk) 05:13, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Bullfighting/Pictures

I am moving some pictures to Talk:Bullfighting/Pictures as a holding area. They are cluttered and I need to remove them to get my thoughts straight... Don't worry, they're going right back. --Falcorian ^(talk) 18:18, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

And done, for now. Two pictures now have no home. I think they'd only clutter the article if put back... But I'm looking for a spot for them. --Falcorian ^(talk) 01:12, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Indulto

I removed the part about a bull surviving as it happens so infrequently as to be almost misleading to include it as a regular cause of applause at a bullfight. One may be an active aficionado attending bullfights for his or her entire life and never see this happen. Also, it is not the first part (third) of the fight that is the most significant. The bull must show unusual bravery and often this is when the bull faces the picador as this is the most painful portion for the bull, but it is not necessarily dispositive. A bull that shown disregard for the discomfort and continues to go after the picador will win points wiht the crowd and the president. Also the performance in the third tercio will be important. the Indulto is only issued when the time to actually kill the bull arives after the faena.--Counsel 00:01, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

have you ever go to a corrida? i have go to a few on plaza de toros, mexico city, and i have seen at least 1 bull to recive the indulto, and i have only been to like 5 bullfights in my short life

Bull-on-bull fighting

Is it still considered bullfighting if no bullfighter is involved? If so, could we have some more coverage of this version of the sport, which is practiced here in Korea? If not, what is the proper term for this sort of fighting? -- Visviva 14:10, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

When I lived in Okinawa, the fights in which a bull fought another bull were called bullfighting as well.--Counsel 01:32, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Recent Reversion

I just reverted an edit removing this statement:

It is notable that Spanish laws against cruelty to animals have abolished most archaic spectacles that had involved animals while including specific exceptions for bullfighting. Animal welfare supporters question why such exemptions would be imposed if bullfighting were not inherently cruel.

The double negative renders this statement nonsensical. If bullfighting were not inherently cruel, as posited, then exceptions for it make sense.--Counsel 17:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate that the language is clumsy, but the point is well made and the revert seems to me to be wrong. The exemption was quite possible inserted because it was felt that prosecutions would succeed. The law protects cruelty - in a similar way that UK animal welfare legislation provided exemptions for fox hunting until recently. MikeHobday 17:52, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

"Iberian Horse"

That part had no information dealing with bullfighting. If the section consisted of facts about how these horses took a role, whether as picador mounts or at rejoneo, it would be welcome. Only some curiosity on horse breeds, even a supposed etymology of the word "Andalusia", etc. But, nothing about bullfighting at all! In its current form, it is impossible for the section to have a presence in this article. Behemoth 20:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Condescending Behemoth

Behemoth (→See also - How can you expect people "see also" when such articles don't even exist? C'mon dear user, this place is not intended to serve your "national sensitivity!) ... ETC.

what??? please don't make assumptive comments about my motives when your expression cries from having a chip on your own shoulder. although i don't disagree with all of your edits you seem to be as pedantic with your comments as you are with your seek and destroy behavior. maybe i'm wrong about YOUR motives but that's what it seems like. if you insist on nitpicking that's amusing since you demonstrate habits that just beg to be picked on. stop the condescending BS, 20 edits in a row with poorly quipped comments encouraging a flame war on the article history page. other than that, your input is appreciated.

Thank you.

Lusitano Transmontano 17:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

---

Issue resolved. Thanks, Behemoth.

Lusitano Transmontano 08:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Cheating

The article currently has a section which outlines allegation of cheating against the bull. The various charges are drawn from a Michener novel about Mexico which includes bullfights in rural Mexico in the 1920's or 30's. Today, Bravos bulls represent a massive investment in money and time. The suggestion that the breeders of these bulls, who's reputations and finacial well-being is determined by the performance of their bulls, would leave these animals unsupervised in a position to be abused immediatly before a bullfight strains credulity. Does anyone have a citation for these allegations where something like this has happened in the past 50 years? Is there anything to this other than the novel? If not, I suggest that the section be revised to reflect that these were allegations of abuse in the past or that a novel incuded such exploits.--Counsel 17:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

This has been posted for quite a while without response. I am removing the cheating section unless there is a source to support it.--Counsel 01:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

83.132.142.225 (Corrected several incorrections regarding Portuguese bullfighting.)

Most of the these so-called corrections are moot and just substituting one thing for another. Removing Nazaré fishermen and putting Ribatejo campinos is without reason, unless you are from Ribatejo (and I wouldn't be surprised if you are). If you must you could leave Nazaré fishermen and just add Ribatejo campinos. The part about Feira do Touro was not incorrect. You just needed to word it in a way that pleased you. Your correction by removing the fight is accordingly referred to as a "bloodless bullfight" is actually incorrect. Whoever wrote that did so accurately since it is indeed bloodless in the ring where the bullfight takes place. The bullfight is not after show when a injured bull may be killed. Severed was changed to covered regarding a bull's horns - yes they are covered but are severed also. Adding covered without removing severed would have been more appropriate. And so on. I would hesitate to call these "corrections".

Lusitano Transmontano 05:28, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

External links

We seem to have a lot of 'em. Removal/conversion to citation type suggestions? - brenneman ^{L} 14:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Dominique Aubier

I found this on the article:

French ethnologist Dominique Aubier considers according to an espistemological study that there is no relationship between the Greek sacrifice which is an agricultural ritualistic celebration or the Roman Gladiators and the bullfight which is in Spain of pure paleontological hunting origins.Dominique Aubier explains that the corrida is a 20 000 year old primitive tradition, and that the theory of a so-called Arabic introduction of the corrida in Spain is an extravancy.

I did some research on Aubier and watch over her article. She seems to have quite esoteric views. Not sure what to make of the above part. Is this mainstream scientic view, because it doesn't cite sources and sounds quite weird to me. But maybe that's just because I'm a newbie when it comes to bullfighting. ;) Best regards, --Plumcouch 12:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I deleted the claim that the corrida is a 20.000 year old primitive tradition - no scientific claim, no references; I'm Im wrong, don't hesitate and correct me. --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 17:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Animal Welfare research for this event should be explored seriously

I didn't know why my back getting pain since last week untill yesterday which was the worst day for me and which was coinsident with the 7/7 2004 London bombing. This also reminds me of the Madrid bombing and the spain train crash last week.

Don't people get allert that this is a very karmic event and needs to be changed to a more civilized form?

Not only animal suffers and now this suffering is epidemic to human like me who is sensitive to the surrounding.

If this old fashined bullfighting doesn't change, more mad cow diseases and bulling of human insidents shall happen

You can't be serious, look how you worded and backed up your thesis. You're saying that the terrorist bombings are connected with bullfighting. Please, support and sign your statement if you're actually serious.--Exander 05:52, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a criticism of the article or just, as it appears to me, pure drivel about karmic consequences. That and UNSIGNED drivel to be precise. AntonioBu 15:49, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Excellent Article

My compliments to the contributors. A sensitively written and balanced article. Well done! AntonioBu 15:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Changes and suggestions to the Portuguese section

I removed this "(usually it is a violent choke)", which was located in the "Forcados" section. How can one say that it is done in that manner? I'd like to know if the person who wrote it is actually a "Forcado". Because think about it.... when the bull is charging fast towards the first guy, his job is to grab the bull by it's neck, because it's the only logical place to where he can securely hang on to while the bull is trying to toss him off. There are plenty of times where the front guy is dangling and barely hanging on the bull. Also, if the front guy is "violently" choking the bull, there would be no need for the rest of the guys to take the bull down. That's why it requires at least 8 guys to take on the bull, because the bull is stronger than them all. I'm also removing it because we don't need animal rights activist coming up with another reason why this is not fair game.

So, unless you are a true Forcado and can actual state how it is truly done, then please make or suggest the corrections.

One additional change I'd like to include (but I haven't done so) is the subject about the horns. It needs to state that when a bull is being fought by a Cavaleiro and grabbed by the Forcados, the horns are covered with a "leather wrap". And for the Matadores, the bulls are not covered nor are they severed. The point of the horn is significant and challenging..

I've read controversial/conversations on the subject of cutting the horns of a bull. Some say that when that occurs, the bull losses their balance. Although, I have documented on video of when the ganaderos have cut a small portion of the tip, filed it down a bit, and then covered it with duck tape. This was during a tienta (tenta), where they test the bulls. It was also for the safety of the amateurs participating in the arena. If anyone objects or has the true facts, please include here.

Thanks--Webmistress Diva 04:07, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

It's not only Lusitano Horses that are used in Portuguese Bullfights and there is no mention of Manuel dos Santos or as he was (well) known in Spain "Manolo dos Santos - a Matador

And as it was said...there is no violent choke, one man cannot choke a 600 Kg Bull half an arena or sometimes almost the entire arena ALONE...and in 8 people, he is the one hagging in the horns and neck of the bull...the others are "fists aids", "second aids" "rabojador" (taile man) etc 18 Fev 2007

Popularity Percentage in Spain

I noticed it is mentioned several times in your article that "Nowadays, less than 10% of Spaniards support bullfighting". It also states a "citation needed" for this number. Why is it being shown then? It is a contraversial figure to say the least! It took me 5 minutes on Google to find several sources disagreeing with this figure and none stating anywhere near 10%. Most in fact stated around a 20 -30% figure and used much improved wording of "XX% of Spaniards have no interest in bullfighting", which to me more accurately represents a NPOV.

The two sources I have put below both appear to use results from the same recent survey (both articles are from January this year). They state 72% of Spaniards have no interest in bullfighting, 82% of "young people". I assume young people would mean under 18 but this is not stated. Surely this should replace the ridiculous and unsighted 10% currently used.

[1] [2]

203.202.43.46 04:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC) Brett

Featured?

Note: I have posted links to this discussion on WikiProject Spain, WikiProject Portugal, and WikiProject France.

I don't believe this article lives up to the standard set for Featured Status anymore, per WP:FA?. In specific, I believe it fails 1.(c) "Factually accurate", as it has almost no citations. It may have a few other problems, but I believe this one to be the most serious. Is anyone willing to help source it? I have a interest in Bullfighting, but almost no knowledge or access to off line sources, so I'd need help in cleaning it up. --Falcorian ^(talk) 16:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You're right, it miserably fails 1c. If there wasn't such a backlog, I'd list it for FAR. Good luck trying to bring it up to shape! :) Raystorm 19:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Bullfighting hazards in "Requiem for the Masses"

I remember that I have the song "Requiem for the Masses" by The Association, and although the song dealt with the death of boxer Davey Moore, as cited in this link, part of its lyrics mentions the hazards of bullfighting, as follows: "Your flag is flying full, / At half-mast for the matadors / Who turned their backs to please the crowd / And all fell before the bull." Just wanted you to know whether to improve the article with this info or not. --Angeldeb82 01:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Advertisment replacing the main image

I just can't stand advertisment replacing the main image in this article. Everytime I go there, there's a random advert like Jessica Alba doing something dirty and smilies. Isn't there a way to prevent this.--Hundred-Man 14:58, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

added guide material to article

Sorry, my remarks got cut off when I posted. I have added some material from the Bullfighting Guide to the AR section of the article and deleted the EL as it is no longer necessary.Bob98133 (talk) 15:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Association with Mithraism

I just ran several pretty thorough database searches for something to substantiate the claim of ancient bullrings having provenance with mithraea but had no success. This is an issue that is of interest to me because I have encountered several reasons for suspecting that this Spanish bullfighting did descend from Mithras worship. If anyone knows more I would like to discuss exploring this possibility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.178.240 (talk) 21:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

The only thing bullfighting and mithraism has in common is a 'bull'. Nothing more. There's no similarity in the sacrifice, or killing methods, at all. Sounds like puff to me. 122.107.56.47 (talk) 12:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

NPOV issue: Proposed changes.

Bullfighting or tauromachy (from Greek ταυρομαχία - tauromachia, "bull-fight"), is a traditional spectacle of Spain, Portugal, some cities in southern France, and several Latin American countries. Its origin is unknown and there are several competing, opposed and inconclusive theories.

Bullfighting is a blood sport, I will address this below, however a link to blood sport should be included in the opening paragraph as it's definitive if we adopt a purposive approach.

This is in ph 3. f you look at an article such as dog fightingyou will see that cruelty is not mentioned in the first ph, although there are few of us who would think that dog fighting is not cruel. I agree that bull fighting is a blood sport, if indeed it is a sport,however to call it a blood sport prior to describing it doesn't make that any more clear. Typically, the topic is defined fairly traditionally, described and then objections or controversies may be presented. This is the way the bullfighting article is at the moment, so shifting the order would make it POV since it would be stressing opposition ahead of explaining the topic. The blood sport article is kind of thin, maybe you want ot add content to that.Bob98133 (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The tradition, as it is practiced today, involves professional performers, toreros (also refered to as toreadors in English), who execute various formal moves with the goal of appearing graceful and confident, while masterful over the bull itself. Such maneuvers are performed at close range, and conclude often with the death of the bull by a well-placed sword thrust as the finale. In Portugal the finale consists of a tradition called the pega, where men (forcados) try to hold the bull by its horns when it runs at them. Forcados are dressed in a traditional costume of damask or velvet, with long knit hats as worn by the campinos (bull headers) from Ribatejo.

I call into contention the neutrality of the term 'professional performers.' Suffice to say, they refer to themselves as atheletes, many people refer to them as warriors. No performer inflicts injury on an animal for the purpose of entertainment, it would be safe to say that since the turn of the century only countries allowing animal blood sports allow such (which proves another point I will come to), however it would be safe to say that the profession of a bull fighter is to inflict grievous injuries on and eventually kill the bull for the entertainment of the audience. This is not a performing art, just as fencing is not interpretive dance.

Someone who gets paid for what they do is a professional. Maybe they're also professional killers or professional sadists, but they are being paid to perform whatever the tradition is. Calling them "professional" is a job status, not priase for their behavior. It is a neutral comment to indicate that they are paid for their "work."Bob98133 (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

It is also worth noting that these professionals (just like professional policemen, professional soldiers, and professional firefighters) fairly frequently get injuries of their own on the job. Some of these injuries are rather grevious, such as death. While probably more bulls die than members of the bullfighting team on average, it would be inappropriate to not mention that bullfighters are indeed trained professionals (not "entertainers") and are subject to injury themselves. Loren.wilton (talk) 21:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

No objections to the changes you made. Lots of professions are inherently dangerous, as you mention, but also test pilots, loggers, acrobats, stunt men. It is somewhat assumed that injuries can result, but no harm mentioning it.Bob98133 (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I suggest that in order to maintain some neutrality in this article that it should be stated outright that the profession is an entertainment role of inflicting injury and death on an animal in a controlled environment.

You are certainly right from your point of view, but Wiki works by concensus, and like it or not, concensus of editors would not support this change. If you want to work/edit in a cooperative environment like Wiki, you've got to accept that everything isn't always going to be the way you want it. If you can find a legitimate reference supporting your point of view, you are welcome to post it to the article. Currrently, you are presenting your point of view without documentation.Bob98133 (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

'while masterful over the bull' is apparently the sanitised term for 'inflicting injury and killing the bull', it's interesting to note that the injuries are not mentioned, and the death is 'often' and not 'almost always', I often go to the toilet, it doesn't mean I'm perminantly on the toilet.  :)

I already know more than I wnat to about your toilet habits, however, I agree that this phrase, 'while masterful over the bull', should be changed since it is point of view. The beginning of the sentence, that "the goal of appearing graceful..." implies that the mastery of the bull is also an appearance, but you're right here. Should say something like "while attempting to maintain mastery over the bull." The fact that they get gored indicates that this is an attempt, not a reasonable description as it now stands.Bob98133 (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Further there is no reference to the large support crew in place for the toreador, who assist in the inflicting of greivous injuries, often severing nerves and muscle groups in the spine and thus essentially assuring that the bull 'fight' isn't quite a fight anymore, controlling the environment even further.

So what? There's no mention of the 300 people or so that work on the Jay Leno show. I think that there is a reasonable assumnption that "professional" performers have support crew. There is no need to mention them all. If you have documentation about how many other "performers" are required to conduct a bullfight, please add that referenced material in the proper place.Bob98133 (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Further, the taunting, irritation and general anguish inflicted on the animal, which falls within all animal cruelty laws of all first world countries (the three that allow bullfighting excluded, of course) should be brought to address foremost.

This may be true, and is addresses somewhat in the Animal Concerns section. Is that the reasons that these other 1st world countries don't have bullfights? That would be interesting to know, but what you suggest adding doesn't address that. Find some documentation about why other countries have banned bullfighting and add that if you like.Bob98133 (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Bullfighting generates heated controversy in many areas of the world, including Spain. Supporters of bullfighting argue that it is a culturally important tradition, while animal rights groups argue that it is a blood sport because of the suffering of the bull and horses during the bullfight.

It doesn't generate heated controversy, at all. There are three countries that could be deemed to be first-world nations who's concept of moral, ethical and decent treatment of animals does not extend to this blood sport. Three, out of how many hundreds of nations? Controversy requires heated debate and lines drawn, there are no lines when it's a miniscule minority versus a vast majority.

This talk page contradicts your statement.Bob98133 (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Supporters do argue that it is a culturally important tradition, and so may it be to them and theirs. However that does not mean that we are to write this article from their point of view, marginalising 'opponents' to this activity as 'animal rights groups'. I have no care what so ever for animal rights, however as a long time Wikipedian I have a care for NPOV and this article stinks of sanitisation and POV bias.

Thus, I propose: -

Bullfighting or tauromachy (from Greek ταυρομαχία - tauromachia, "bull-fight"), is a public entertainment blood sport, legal only in Spain, Portugal, some cities in Southern France and some Latin American countries. Its origins are unnown and there are several competing, opposed and inconclusive theories.

No problem with this if you go into theories of origins with references as well as a reference that its origins are uncertain. Otherwise, we'd have articles on the Atom that say things like "nobody knows what this looks like or has ever seen one, so their existence is in doubt."Bob98133 (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The sport, in its contemporary incarnation, involves armed men, toreros (or toreadors in English), who execute various formalise injuries to the bull inflicting gradually escalating grievous injuries to the animal with the aim of appearing graceful and confident, whilst weakening the bull itself. Such maneuvers are carried out at close range, however a formal support crew including armed and mounted men, as well as other armed men on foot are present to carry out further formalised injuries to the animal in an attempt to weaken it to the point of collapse. At this point the fight is concluded with the death of the bull, objectively carried out with a well-placed sword thrust into the neck of the animal. In Portugal the killing of the animal occurs only after men (forcados) try to hold the injured bull and push it to the ground by its horns when it runs at them. Forcados are dressed in a traditional costume of damask or velvet, with long knit hats as worn by the campinos (bull headers) from Ribatejo.

Some of this could be included, but just reading this doesn't give you more of an idea about the author than the topic.Bob98133 (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Bullfighting, whilst illegal in most parts of the world, is deemed by its fans to be a culturally important tradition. Critics of bullfighting argue that given that the tradition has no origin point and a very sketchy history that calls on Roman era animalia combat as a historical frame of reference, that it is merely another blood sport at the expense of animals.

Please provide feedback on this matter. I will be reviewing comments in 24 hours and making ammendments and repeating until we come to some general agreement of how best to make the opening part, at least, of this article a little more neutral. 122.107.56.47 (talk) 12:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I suggest that instead of establishing a time line and threatening to make changes and repeating, that you continue to disucss this on the talk page until concensus is reached, otherwise your unreferenced, anonymous edits will likely be quickly reverted.Bob98133 (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect Reference?

In the section titled "Animal Concerns," the statement, "It has been estimated that 70% of the attendees at Barcelona's Monumental bullring are tourists.[7]" does not seem to be supported by any percent figures I can find at reference #7 (an About.com article).

(I really need a source if there is one for this figure, as I would like to address a group that intends to travel to Spain next month and take in a bullfight. Thanks in advance for any help.)

--DianeC'est ma (talk) 19:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

You're right, the reference says no such thing. I removed it and tagged the claim as needing a citation. What the About.com article states is: "It is difficult to gauge how many people in the audience of a bullfight are tourists and how many are local aficionados." →Wordbuilder (talk) 19:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply and correction. Is the original author of that section around, and if so, do you know where you might have gotten the original percent estimate from?C'est ma (talk) 22:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Animal Concerns - Portugal/Colombia

The references for both of these items are in Spanish and also appear to be from advocacy organizations (they are also inline refs and could be formated as reflist references). I left the information and references up for now, assuming good faith, but these two items really need reliable, English references. Bob98133 (talk) 13:19, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Criticism

I think this article needs a better section about criticism of the bullfights, from intelectual and religious points of view. Pope St. Pius V banned bullfights in the 16 th century, but he latter had to accept the demands of Philip II of Spain. I´m from Portugal and I know that many great writers and intelectuals have opposed it through time. I can think about Portuguese writer José Maria Ferreira de Castro and Brazilian writer Érico Veríssimo.213.13.246.220 (talk) 16:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Scope for more information

Specifically I was looking for information about what makes the bull mad. Do they feed something to it? And I would have liked some links to more articles such as riding the jumping bull. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.142.232.4 (talk) 15:13, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Citation needed for existence of bullring infirmaries

This article by Spanish newspaper El Mundo discusses the issue of "cirugia taurina" (bullfighting surgery) and talks about the need for better infirmaries thus confirming their existence. http://www.elmundo.es/suplementos/salud/2005/618//1116626415.html

Also th epage of the "Asociacion Española de Cirugia Taurina" (Spanish Association of Bullfighting Surgery) defines "cirugia taurina" as "specialidad de la patología quirúrgica practicada por los equipos médicos-cirujanos que atienden las enfermerías de las plazas de toros del mundo taurino."(The speciality of Surgical pathology practised by medical-surgical teams tending the infirmaries in the bullfighting rings of the world) further confirming the existence and prevalence of these infirmaries:

http://www.cirugiataurina.info/historia.htm

This other link discusses at length the history and uses of these infirmaries:

http://www.cirugiataurina.info/recuerdo.htm

I do not know if this are appropriate sources for wikipedia. However the widespread existence of these infirmaries and of specialized medical teams tending them can easily be proved.

93.96.47.54 (talk) 18:47, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Danger

I agree with the recent edit that bullfighting appears to be dangerous. However, lots of things appear to be dangerous, but that is only appearance. For example, is it dangerous for a magician's assistant to be sawed in half? It certainly looks that way, but that is not the case. As with all performances involving personal risk, there is a tendency to exagerate the risk. To determine the actual risk one needs actuarial tables, or a statistical analysis of the number of injuries per performance. It could be that inline roller skating is far more dangerous than bullfighting, despite the horns. Let's see some stats that indicate that it really is dangerous to be a matador, not just that it appears to be dangerous. I have reinstated the fact tag for this factoid. Bob98133 (talk) 14:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Having to interpret an image is WP:OR. However, tables and statistical analysis may be overkill. The claim merely needs to be stated by a reliable source to be added to the article. →Wordbuilder (talk) 14:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely. I wasn't sugggesting that all that info had to be included, but a reasonable reference should be cited. Bob98133 (talk) 15:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Pardoned bulls &c.

In answer to some rather mistaken views above on when the bull wins, I thought I should add the following: if the bull kills or fatally gores a matador in the ring, he is usually killed by another matador in the ring, or certainly by a vet outside. His mother is then killed, so that man-killing bulls do not continue to be bred (witness the head of the bull 'Islera' in the museum of the La Maestranza bullring in Seville, whose son Islero killed Manolete). Bulls pardoned before the moment of death for their 'bravery' in the ring, los toros indultados, are a separate phenomena. They live their lives out well on ranches, although they do not automatically become seedbulls - their offspring are tested for fighting quality first. N.B. The corrida is many things, some good, some bad - but it is not a sport.

P.S. There is a supersition that when a matador kills a bull who has killed a matador already, he will himself die on the horns of a bull. The last full matador to die on the horns of a bull was El Yiyo, in 1985. Less than a year before he had killed Avispado, the bull which had just fatally gored Paquirri.

For more information on the fight, see my essay on bullfighting 'A Noble Death', published in September 2008's issue of Prospect (magazine).

Alexander Fiske-Harrison --Fiskeharrison (talk) 00:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Editorial consistency?

I notice in this article there are numerous instances where the Spanish is given, followed by the English word or explanation. Sometimes this is done like this: Corrida (bullfight); other times it is Corrida ("bullfight"); and sometimes it is Corrida, or bullfight. The one with quotes is silly. The one in parenthesis is OK, I suppose. I'd like to see the article be more reader-friendly by having all of these instances included in the text, like the third version above. Whatever format is considered best should be used, but in any case, the format should be consistent throughout the article. Bob98133 (talk) 14:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Why red cape?

I looked at dozens of references trying to find one to replace the fact tag that the reason that the cape used in bullfighting is red. The only one I could find is the one I put in the article, and even that reference is not very good - it is on a commercial tourism web site. Every other source I looked at claimed that the red cape was used because of tradition. Before replacing a referenced edit with a fact tag, please include a new reference to support your edit. The reason I didn't cite the many, many references to the red cape being traditional is that it seems to be the overwhelming reason. If the red cape is used to disguise blood stains, let's see some references for it. I have reverted the text to the referenced version. Bob98133 (talk) 14:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a reference, but I've heard on TV from a bullfighting expert that the cape was originally white and then it was made red to conceal the blood stains. Whoever wrote that on the article probably heard the same thing. --Jotamar (talk) 19:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Maybe that's true, but for the sake of the article it needs a solid reference. Bob98133 (talk) 19:35, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I am in the ring on a daily basis with matadors and other toreros and everyone says it is to conceal the blood. Hence the cape used at the beginning on the uninjured bull is pink and yellow. If you want to cite a reference, you'll find it in Hemingway's Death In The Afternoon and A.L.Kennedy's On Bullfighting. In fact, you can cite my long essay on Prospect magazine, A Noble Death (avaliable online)--Fiskeharrison (talk) 21:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Gore

Before the adoption of the peto all horses were gored in the ring and all died. Since that adoption, practically none are. Therefore, by definition, it is less gory for horses - it has nothing to do with how I, or others, might feel. This is not the place to express outrage or sensation. Equally, the matadors are gored as often as before, but improved vascular surgery and antibiotics have reduced their mortality to rate from 1 in 4 to none since 1986, which is why they come into that category.

And no, I do not support the bullfight, but am spending one year studying it. And please do not vandalise my userpage. --Fiskeharrison (talk) 11:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I keep reverting these edits by 152.17.58.78 because he is removing a factual statement about the (vast) reduction in injuries to horses to replace it with an unsourced comment about his opinion about what people who don't like the bullfight feel. Just as I have in the past removed unsourced and irrelevant comments from aficionados about the 'heroism' of the matadors. 'Animal concerns' about barbarism are well addressed elsewhere in the article (as are risks to the matadors). --Fiskeharrison (talk) 10:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Link needs to be taken down (What happens when the bull wins video

Link name External links

• What can Happen When The Bull Wins Kinda Graphic

Hey. This video shows a bull fighter being killed on video. I hate bull fighters. So i think thats awesome. But unfortunetly the site it leads to is one of those sick shock sites. My mum accidentally clicked into it today and was very upset. I think we have a problem. Any one care to fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.179.16 (talk) 10:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello any reply's Wikipedia?

I suggest your mom read the "Kinda graphic" note next to the link and not click it again. Please sign your posts. Bob98133 (talk) 16:08, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored. However, I have removed the video, but only because it is highly unlikely it complies with WP:YT. As a simple check of the earlier mentioned site will show, copyright certainly is not something they consider highly, if at all. Before adding links to any video (regardless of content), please do make sure copyright is not an issue. A simple check of the site hosting a video will often give a good idea. 62.107.237.72 (talk) 03:31, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Saying "Tu Quoque"

Comparing bull-fighting with commercial cattle farming is a tu-quoque argument and, like all such, self-contradictory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.167.10 (talk) 11:45, 4 April 2010 (UTC) See Tu quoque. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.167.10 (talk) 11:51, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

'Matador'

where in the bullfighting world is 'matador' a common term for the torero? In the United States, amongst people who know absolutely nothing about bullfights, the word 'matador' is standard. But I have never encountered it in places where bullfighting actually occurs, and there are some comments to the same effect on the matador page. It seems clear to me that that page should be moved to torero, and that there should be some clarification on this page. But I don't feel qualified to make that clarification... Is 'matador' simply wrong? Is there somewhere where bullfights actually occur, and this word is used in favor of 'torero'?

- Ncsaint 17:33, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Matador is word used in the Spanish speaking world. The word in Spanish for bullfighter is torero. Not all Toreros are bullfighters. Matador is the highest level of torero. It is sort of like being in the major leagues. A particularly promising torero is presented at a major bull by a current matador (his sponsor, so to speak) and the older matador formally asks the novillero to kill one of his bulls for him at which point the torero is promoted to full matador.--Counsel 18:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

but where? it's simply not true that 'matador' is used in 'the Spanish speaking world' in that way. People in Andalucia, for instance, are aware of the word, but have no use for it, in my experience. So where is this word being used? - Ncsaint 22:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

DRAE defines matador as "torero who kills by the sword". Banderilleros, picadores and rejoneadores are not matadores, but I think at least some of them are toreros. --Error 00:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Matador is a Spanish word and is used in spanish. The Spanish version of Wiki has this to say about the varios levels of promotion among Toreros: "El torero tiene varias etapas de formación, obtenida por la práctica. La primera etapa es la de novillero, en la que se lidia novillos debido a su menor tamaño y fuerza, comenzando generalmente en festivales sin caballos, para luego pasar a novilladas con picadores de acuerdo a sus resultados. La segunda etapa es la de matador, donde el torero ha conseguido destreza suficiente para desarrollar con estilo y técnica todos los tercios de la lidia. Cuando un novillero logra, en teoría, los méritos necesarios alcanzar el grado de matador, realiza una corrida especial denominada alternativa. La alternativa se puede conseguir en cualquier plaza de toros de primera categoría; sin embargo generalmente los matadores realizan una confirmación de su alternativa en plazas de particular tradición como Las Ventas en Madrid o la Monumental de Ciudad de México." If you are not a spanish speaker, this says largely the same thing that I wrote in English above.

The assertion that the article as written should be moved to "Torero" is largely valid, however. The article is not particularly accurate right now. It confuses Matador with Toreros in general. The article under Toreador is flat wrong. Matador is used in Spanish. It is roughly (very roughly) analogous to saying "major leaguer" rather than "ball player". Torero is the more common word, however picadors, peones, novilleros, and rejoneadores are all toreros. Only a Torero who is skilled in the third tercio of the corrida and has been presented at Las Ventas or Monumental is a Matador. This is the person who works the bull with the muleta and kills him with the sword in a major bullfight. I think that this article should be corrected and clarified to explain the role of a Matador vis a vie the rest of the players in a corrida, or it should be expanded to include all of the Toreros in a corrida and moved to that title. I believe the latter is the better option.--Counsel 17:07, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I copied this discussion to the Matador page. Probably the better place for it.--Counsel 17:21, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

"matador" in spanish means killer!.--. 17:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Bloodless Bullfighting (Portuguese Style)

I created a separate area for "Bloodless Bullfighting" since it is different from the classic Spanish style of bullfighting.

So, if any is here that has an input for this section, it would be nice if you can go over to the new area and make your inputs there.

Thanks in advance. --Webmistress Diva 09:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Isn't that like fake fur? I'll just go on to pretend that I am non-PC.(82.134.28.194 (talk) 06:29, 4 May 2010 (UTC))

Cultural references to bullfighting

I think that this should be adressed somewhere in the article. An excellent example is the book Mexico, by James Michener.Mk5384 (talk) 00:51, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Cockfight in Cuba

Should it be mentioned that Cuba has allowed cockfighting for decades after its independence? --Error (talk) 22:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

nonsense Statements and Legends

in the chapter "Cultural aspects" it is stated: "Bulls learn fast and their capacity to do so should never be underestimated. Indeed, a bullfight may be viewed as a race against time for the matador, who must display his bullfighting skills before the animal learns what is going on and begins to thrust its horns at something other than the cape." Sorry, but this is garbage. Sadly the bull is bred for a special kind of intelligence may say stupidity and visual inabilities so mostly the only thing he even sees are the Capa or Muleta. If otherwise, no way would 99.9% of all bull fights end in this calculated way! There are also other fairy tales in this article which should be removed. E.g. there ist always mentioned how respected or adored the bull in the Spanish society is. Confronted with those sarcastic fiestas, where bulls are tortured over hours (e.g. Corria, Tordesillas etc.), and those unmentioned young bulls, even calves, who are butchered in Bullfighting Schools or even by private persons (everybody can kill a bull and if he is to coward a cow by a hand full of Euros), it's undoubtedly that bullfight is only one aspect of a backwarded society where animal protection stands only at the beginning. --77.116.170.152 (talk) 14:52, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Agree. I've pulled a lot of the redundant stuff out. Bob98133 (talk) 21:46, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

bull approval by the presidente and the audience

I heard that if the audience whistles, or if the president does not give his consent then the bull can be removed from the arena due to a lack of brevity.63.19.181.150 01:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes if the president and the veterinarian advisor consider that the bull is inperfect, disabled or not brave enough. Then a few oaxes (mansos) are let to enter the arena to help to return the bull quietly to the corral.Then it's replaced by a reserve bull, sobrero.

Las Ventas' head steward, el mayoral Florito is known to help the bull leaving the arena by waving his jacket with big applauses ussually.

http://www.elpais.com/articulo/cultura/FLORITO_/TOROS/MADRID/MADRID_/MUNICIPIO/FERIA_DE_SAN_ISIDRO/mayoral/Florito/revelacion/temporada/elpepicul/19860525elpepicul_3/Tes http://www.abc.es/20081006/toros-toros/suerte-llamarse-florito-20081006.html

Xanti - Valencia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.229.172.123 (talk) 15:57, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Edits to Recortes

I disagree with the revision done at 14:08, 16 August 2007 by Bob98133 who says he "removed unreferenced and POV content". My opinion is that rather than remove POV he introduced his own POV.

In the section "Recortes" he changes "The bull is not harmed in any way" to "The bull is not visibly harmed". What is this supposed to mean? That the bull may be "invisibly" harmed? It is a true fact that "The bull is not harmed in any way" (obviously barring unforeseen accidents). The phrase should be restored. The new wording just leaves open the suggestion that the bull may be harmed even if not "visibly".

"They perform jumps and other daring acrobatics..." is changed to "They perform jumps and other acrobatics..." What is the point of removing the word "daring"? The stunts are, in fact, daring, very daring! They are not just any acrobatics but very daring indeed with high risk of serious injury or death. The change just reflects his POV, not the facts.

"It is probable that these events will continue to grow in popularity as they are less objectionable to animal rights advocates..." is changed to "These events may grow in popularity as they are less objectionable to the general public..." which, again, shows bias as trying to imply that all of the general public is opposed to bullfights which is certainly not the case. Also the change "It is probable that these events will continue to grow in popularity..." to "These events may grow in popularity..." is just silly just like the twice removal of the word "continue". It is a fact that these events have been growing in popularity in the last years and if they continue to grow, well, they continue the growth.

The fact is that the trend is for growth and that there are reasons which favor the growth so it is a fair assessment to say that "It is probable that these events will continue to grow in popularity".

I propose that the wording be restored. GS3 20:02, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand the points you make, but using words like "daring" is a point of view. Some people may think it's stupid or irresponsible. It is best without the adjective. Unless you can provide documentation to show not only an increase in popularity but a predicted future increase, those statments too are best toned down. As for the bull being harmed, I suppose you would have no objections to restoring your wording and including "barring unforeseen accidents?"

Anything you can reasonably document is fine with me, but the changes I made were because these things weren't documented, just opinion. Sorry, I tried to remove the opinion, but just reverting isn't acceptible. Bob98133 20:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid your bias is showing. Daring is not POV, it is a factual description according to the dictionary. Either it is "daring" or it is "not daring". Are you willing to support that jumping over the horns of a charging bull is not "daring"?

I live in Spain and in the last few weeks I have seen quite a few events shown on TV while just a few years ago this was unheard of. But I am not going to spend a lot of time documenting this. Search Google for "concurso de recortes" and similar terms and see how many you find from, say, before and after 2000. If every affirmation in Wikipedia had to be similarly supported Wikipedia would disappear into insignificance, beginning with this very article. I affirm from my own experience that these events have grown in popularity and you do not like this assertion but you have no proof to the contrary so you just ask me to spend time proving it. You have presented no contradictory information, only that you want me to prove an assertion that you do not seem to like. Can you offer any evidence that my assertion is not accurate? I don't think so.

As to adding "barring unforeseen accidents" to my phrase "the bull is not harmed in any way" I find it plainly ridiculous as it is understood that any activity may have unforeseen accidents which may result in harm. In the article Bed of nails it says "the volunteer is not harmed" and anyone with an ounce of common sense understands that an accident may still happen from which harm may result. The fact is that in the normal course of events the bull is not harmed in any way and what the article is supposed to describe is the normal course of events. Again, trying to inject those words just shows your bias. Or do you really propose that every description of events include every possibility of what could go wrong? GS3 21:44, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, the way this works is that if you post something you should be able to document it. I am asking you to document an increase in popularity. "Affirmations from your own experience" are not acceptible as documentation. I think daring indicates that this is an exceptional circumstance and, in fact, it is a routine performance, so I think that daring is POV. If you so strongly disagree then I'll leave it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bob98133 (talk • contribs) 22:54:26, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

Look, this is nonsense and you know it. You are a self-described animal rights activist and admin wannabe. You are the one with bias and agenda, not me. When I have some time I will try to find some information regarding the increase in popularity and when I do I will restore every one of my words. If you have a problem with that you can call an admin to settle this because I am not convinced by your POV. GS3 17:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

My only problem is with undocumented assertions being posted as fact. I appreciate you taking the time to document this material. Where did I describe myself as an animal rights activist? Is it wrong to want to be a Wiki admin? Bob98133 18:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

No your problem is with assertions which do not fit your agenda even if you have no objective reason to doubt their veracity. You could have put a "citation needed" tag but you chose to delete what you don't like. That is not being constructive. Look at Running of the Nudes. It has not a single cite in support of any of the asserted facts. Will you delete it in its entirety? Or should I do it? Do we really want to go down this path? GS3 22:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

The word "daring" (according to Wikidictionary and Wikipedia: willing to take on or look for risks, courageous and/or foolhardy bold behaviour, showing bravery) is used in the following articles together with similar adjectives to describe actions of US military personnel in action. If you remove every single instance of the word in those articles as "unacceptible" because it is just a POV then I will drop my request that the word be reinstated here. a daring helicopter rescue in Vietnam, a daring resourceful and courageous leader, a daring airborne rescue operation in Vietnam, a daring raid, another daring raid. GS3 22:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Fine. Put "daring" back. I'm convinced. If you'd cited some examples earlier on, I'd have agreed then.Bob98133 23:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I have restored the original text. If you have a problem with any of it I suggest you propose any changes in this discussion page before making them there because I strongly believe the wording is just fine and I will insist on it. If you have a problem with the "increase in popularity" I have no problem with your adding a "citation needed" tag until such citation is provided. I will not agree to its removal unless you can present a citation to the contrary . GS3 10:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

These changes have been discussed. You failed to provide documentation for your assertion that Recourtes is increasing in popularity. Your assertion that animal rights advocates find this more acceptible than traditional bullfighting is ludicrous and unfounded. My understanding is that animal rights advocates do not believe in any animal use for entertainment, so there is no chance whatsoever that they would find Recourtes any less objectionable than traditinal bullfighting. If you wanted to change that to "animal welfare advocates" or "the general public" - the change I made earlier - I would agree that it would be more reasonable. I agreed with you, after you provided documentation, that "daring" was used properly and that I did not oppose it being re-inserted. However, the other reversions you made are NOT acceptible and were done without regard to the discussion. I have added citation tags, however I will revert the section about animal rights advocates and increasing popularity soon since it is your obligation as the editor posting them to document contentious citations, not mine. I will give you a day or two to find citations to support these items, then will revert them or change them if you do not. Despite your statement that you "will insist" I think it would be better if you documented things prior to insisting that they are true. Thanks. Bob98133 18:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

>> You failed to provide documentation for your assertion that Recourtes is increasing in popularity.
And you have not provided any evidence to the contrary either. As I said, I have no objection to the "citation needed" tag but if you want to remove it you should seek consensus here. No matter how much you would like it you are not an administrator yet. If you want to prevail please seek consensus here or find contrary proof. You may challenge my assertion if you have proof to the contrary. Do you?

>> Your assertion that animal rights advocates find this more acceptible than traditional bullfighting is ludicrous and unfounded.
The spelling is "acceptable". Are you seriously proposing that people who care for animal welfare see no difference between a corrida, where the bull is injured and killed, and an event where the bull suffers no harm whatsoever? Really? You are saying that those people have no problem really with the blood, the injuries and the killing but their objection is to... enticing the bull to running around? What world do you live in? In my world this looks pretty stupid just on its face.

>> My understanding is that animal rights advocates do not believe in any animal use for entertainment, so there is no chance whatsoever that they would find Recourtes any less objectionable than traditinal bullfighting.
"Animal rights advocates", by definition, includes anyone who cares about and defends animal welfare. Not only, as you seem to imply, some nutty, radical organization like PETA who equate eating chicken with the Holocaust. The rest of the population, i.e. those who do not particularly care about animals' welfare, would not be affected one way or the other as there is no reason they would find any difference on that account. Furthermore, in this case we are talking about animal rights advocates in Spain which, just to state the obvious, are not American.

>> However, the other reversions you made are NOT acceptible and were done without regard to the discussion.
Again, the place to discuss that is here. If you find ample support for your position then your wording shall prevail over mine. You are not an administrator yet and you have absolutely no authority to determine what is "acceptible".

You want me to provide a lot of support for my wording while you are not even bothering to answer half of my questions and points. Again, look at Running of the Nudes, you want to delete it in its entirety as unsupported by cites? It seems you think you can demand others to spend a lot of time justifying every single word while you are exempt from that requirement. You can play the game too by finding cites that support your POV.

If you revert then I will revert and we *will* get the admins involved. You need to get off the idea that you have some authority over what others post. It would also be helpful if you got off your agenda but that may be impossible. GS3 13:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

P.S. After some reflection I would propose "those concerned with the bull's welfare", "those who find the suffering of the bull objectionable", or similar wording in place of "animal rights advocates". I am not so concerned with the wording but just want to point out that Recortes are acceptable to many who find bullfights unacceptable on account of the blood and suffering of the bull. GS3 14:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, GS3 - now we're getting somewhere! Either of those wordings are fine with me - your choice. I agree with what you say in your PS, but the wording should be clear - which your proposed changes are. I won't revert or complain about any change like that.

Just for discussion: This definition of yours ["Animal rights advocates", by definition, includes anyone who cares about and defends animal welfare.]is absolutely wrong or the National Cattlemens Assoc., fast food outlets, etc., who claim to care and support animal welfare, would be animal rights advocates - which they wouldn't agree with. Perhaps the distinction isn't so fine in Spain, but in the US and UK these types of distinctions are bitterly fought over. The different point of views of animal rights and animal welfare are detailed on those pages, but basically AR says no animals should be used at all, while AW says they can be used but should be treated humanely. Obviously there is a lot of overlap.

Thanks for considering these changes. If it is of concern to you, put a "citation needed" on the Running of the Nudes page and I will get around to documenting it. Sorry if I haven't answered other questions - just ask again if it's important. Again, I appreciate your willingness to work this out and apologize if I was harsh or impolite earlier.Bob98133 15:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I have made that change and the wording of that section is acceptable to me as it is. I hope it is acceptable for you too. GS3 08:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Bullfights, touradas, make me sick. I'm from Portugal and they do that shit a lot. This is not art! This is torture! The Bulls have their lives, they don't care about us, they don't kills us, they're vegetarian! So what's the fucking point in killing an Animal that doesn't want to kill us?? We, humans, have no right to stab a Bull to see if it's brave or not! Stab your mother and father you asses! No fucking common scence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.38.174 (talk) 17:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear Admins, please note recortes and similar street or arena bull games are also practised in many other parts of Spain like the Valencian region, and West of Castilla. pls check www.toroalcarria.com and www.bousalcarrer.com Xanti - Valencia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.229.172.123 (talk) 16:04, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Bull vs Elephant

An unusual kind of bullfight: El elefante Nerón contra el toro Sombrerito. --Error (talk) 18:07, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

====Bullfighting in Latin America

It is not true that bullfighting is legal in MOST of Latin American countries. It is legal in FEW Latin American countries. In most of them the "corrida" is only joking and running to the bull, without injuring him. There is no mention whatsoever in the article which countries in Latin America allows bullfighting spanish-style (killing the bull). They are Mexico,Colombia,Venezuela,Peru and Ecuador. http://www.cas-international.org/es/home/sufrimiento-de-toros-y-caballos/corridas-de-toros/corridas-de-toros-en-latinoamerica/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.9.55.107 (talk) 14:17, 27 October 2010 (UTC) In Central America the corrida is praticed without injuring the bull, just running around him and trying to touch him in the horns or hit him with a newspaper.58.9.55.107 (talk) 14:24, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Catalan confusion

Some separatists despise bullfighting because of its association with the Spanish nation. Recently Barcelona, the capital of Catalonia was declared an anti-bullfighting town. However, even a former Herri Batasuna leader was a novillero before becoming a politician. This is all very unlikely, since the pre-Christian religious significance and the former heart of bullfighting country is precisely Catalonia, Navarre and occitania. Wetman 21:32, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I think it's accurate at least in Catalonia. I don't know in the past, but presently, bullfighting is not very popular in many parts of Catalonia. Furthermore, bullfighting has been heavily promoted as a symbol of Spain (fiesta nacional), which does not make it popular at all for catalan nationalists. Xevi 09:35, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Bullfighting has never been that popular in Catalonia amongst Catalans; the only famous Catalan bullfighter was Mario Cabre in the 1950s. While bullfights were long popular in Barcelona, few Catalans attended the bullfights ; most of the spectators were from other parts of Spain or from foreign countries. One of Barcelona's two arenas had been shut down long before the ban. Bullfights in the Baleares have generally catered to tourists. The heart of bullfighting country is considered to be Andalusia, where the spectacle began in its modern form, where the best bulls are raised, and which continues to produce the most bullfighters and have the highest level of popular interest in the spectacle.

hamna ha —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.187.147 (talk) 22:48, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Confusion over ban

If Catalonia has banned bullfighting, why are there still bullfights going on in Barcelona? I spoke to the man who works at the Barcelona bull ring and he described the Catalan government's declaration that bullfighting was illegal as 'propaganda' and said that no law had been passed. Can anyone enlighten us on this?

Barcelona city council (not Catalonia) has not banned bullfighting. They have just made a public statement against bullfights being held in the city. They don't have the powers to forbid bullfighting, though. [Manel]

So then the law is less real than the English foxhunting ban? (82.134.28.194 (talk) 06:26, 4 May 2010 (UTC))

Bullfighting used to be popular in Catalonia . Don't some rabid Catalan separatist consider Roussillon part of Catalonia? Well, there are popular bullfightings in Perpignan and matadors wear the typical Catalonian barretina onto their heads. Also bullfightings are popular in Nîmes and many cities of southern France. To demote bullfightings in Catalonia (like the autonomous Government does since 1980) is not very Catalan from the historical and cultural point of view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.37.82.199 (talk) 14:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

toreador in the OED

i looked up toreador in the OED and there are references that pre-date Bizet's Carmen, so I think that explanation (near the top of the page) is probably wrong. 99.60.179.53 (talk) 22:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)neil

Nice catch. Looked up in OED too and you're absolutely right. Taking that out. (Anyone want to provide a source for that Carmen statement, bring it!) Otherwise going with OED, which considers torreador and torrero synonyms. Thanks!! Bob98133 (talk) 22:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Oldest bullring?

I read here: "and the oldest is the La Maestranza in Sevilla, Spain, which was first used for bullfighting in 1765". However, the reference given for that statement does not support it – it just says that the Prince's box was finished in 1765. The oldest bullring is "normally" said to be that of Ronda, as for example here. The Ronda today renounces that claim and gives more detail, suggesting that the Sevilla ring was started sooner, but the first corrida was held in May 1784 in that of Ronda (of which about a quarter fell down during the show). Maybe someone with the necessary knowledge and sources could confirm or deny this, and perhaps if necessary correct it in the article? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:35, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Oman bulfighting?

As I understood from the photo, it is not the savage bullfight of the Spanish world, but a (mating) competition among 2 males of the same species. Which can be seen in any part of the world( wild or domesticated, most cattle have similar fights). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.107.89.84 (talk) 21:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Korean bullfighting

This article distinctly lacks the fact that bullfights also occur in south Korea.

Here is some proof: http://www.lifeinkorea.com/activities/traditional.cfm

Dumoren (talk) 04:25, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

According to your source, Korean bullfighting involves two bulls fighting each other, so it might be hard to integrate this into existing text. Bob98133 (talk) 14:01, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

The thing is that most of nations in the world performs bull fight by having two bulls fighting against each other. the Hmong, the Koreans, the Japanese, the Ryukyuans, the Dong, and the Chinese. This article should at least have some reference to that, so that people who want to know more about that type of bull fight can get more information. PhilaSiti (talk) 00:56, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Female bull fighters

Could this article mention female bullfighters and issues associated with gender in bullfighting. I've been trying to find the name of the successful female bullfighter and was disappointed that your page had no reference of her or gender issues in bullfighting. Could someone in the know help amend this oversight? Thanks:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.151.32.98 (talk) 22:34, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

There is a page about female bullfighters (es:toreras) in the Spanish Wikipedia. Jotamar (talk) 00:27, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

American Opinion Poll. Why?

What is the significance/relevance of the American opinion poll in the Public Opinion section? I'm tempted to say 'who cares'? It would make more sense if it said something like...Bull-Fighting is controversial in countries which do not traditionally have Bull-Fights, for example a poll in America said...DeCausa (talk) 14:38, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

My take on relevance is tourism, i.e. if there are fewer American tourists interested in bullfighting, perhaps that could affect the economy of the industry. Just my thought...Bob98133 (talk) 19:20, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Likewise, I think the poll on “interest” in bullfighting is a bit out of place and unbalancing. I’d like to see poll data on how many Spaniards are “for” or “against” bullfighting. — TheHerbalGerbil^(TALK|STALK), 10:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree, the material is obviously out of place. As a partial solution I've relocated it in the 'Animal rights' subsection as a way of providing a brief example of the strength of sentiment internationally. Not ideal, I realize... —MistyMorn (talk) 12:06, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Separating out bull-vs-bull competitions?

I see this topic has been discussed a bit above, but wanted to re-open the issue.

In the article now, we have:

• Man vs. bull fights to the death
• Events where people tease and dodge a bull, and it's not killed during the event or at all
• Events where bulls are allowed/encouraged/forced to fight other bulls

I would argue that the 1st and 2nd items should fit in "bullfighting", but I'm not sure about the third. Is it "bullfighting" if it's just animal on animal? Sure, "dogfighting" doesn't involve a person fighting a dog, so the basic simple words themselves don't clear up much.

Should an article on bulls-fighting-bulls be a separate (and mentioned/linked) article to be filed more with the other blood-sports like dog/cock/quail/insect/beta fighting, and the man vs. bull sports kept in this article? Or should we make additions to this article for bull vs. bull sports like Okinawan and Korean "bullfighting"? MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:44, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Animal Concerns (again)

I've edited the "Animal Concerns" section significantly to make it a bit more NPOV and added references to support the opening sentence.

Also rearranged the order of the paragraphs. The structure was a little confused the way it was orginally.

I wonder about the name of the whole section. Wouldn't a better name be "Contraversy" or "Criticism" instead of "Animal Concerns"? Or is the current name a compromise to settle down some flame war that erupted in the past?

I tried to clear up this citation tag and couldn't do it:

It has been estimated that 70% of the attendees at Barcelona's Monumental bullring are tourists.[citation needed]

Other than numerous web pages simply copying from this very article, I could find no source for that statistic. While I'm sure that the majority of spectators really are tourists, I believe someone either pulled this statistic out of their rear end or they misinterpreted a survey of local residents.

I left it in there but I think that sentence should be removed or disputed.

I cleared up this citation tag:

"Bloodless" variations, though, are permitted and have attracted a following in California, and France[citation needed].

I found several examples of bloodless bullfighting in California and chose an LA Times article. As for France, further up this same article it mentions two forms of bloodless bullfighting in France, which has its own reference. Since nobody has disputed that section or called for citations, I removed the tag. Rooker75 (talk) 01:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Your changes look good. Thanks. Bob98133 (talk) 14:15, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

There is a picture on Facebook that purports to Torero Alvaro Munera having an epiphany about killing bulls. There is no article about this man in English Wikipedia, but there is a brief one in Spanish Wikipedia, that could perhaps be translated to English. Apparently, this matador began to oppose bullfighting after becoming quadriplegic while injured in a bullfight. I'm not sure how to sign based on the instructions above 67.181.31.203 (talk) 21:26, 22 July 2012 (UTC)bowermang@comcast.net

origins

Modern bullfighting links backwards to the ancient rite detailed in the sky with banderilla and sword used to slay the bull leading to deification...of the participant. (Right of perfection - that sought after connection to heaven making the particpant a god. (sic-the grandmaster of the Priore de Sion/JC). /s/ GMPS what are the 2 names to describe the people who do bullfighting????????? :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.6.189.46 (talk) 14:17, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

older entries

What is lavanae poisening? I can't find it anywhere.

This was bullshit. Meat from bullfights is sold and consumed. I've corrected it. There is plenty of evidence on the web in this regard, including the text of the current Spanish Royal Decree that regulates the handling of bull meat from bullfights and its market:

Real Decreto 260/2002, de 8 de marzo, por el que se fijan las condiciones sanitarias aplicables a la producción y comercialización de carnes de reses de lidia [3]

At a bullfight I attended at a fiesta in a town in Yucatan, the killed bulls were promptly butchered and cooked as food for the fiesta. Is this rare or common? -- Infrogmation 02:40 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)

They are usually sold to local butchers or restaurants, but doing it so fast doesn't seem common (or gourmetly). -- Error

In Portugal, is commom what Error says, and its also for fiesta (called, festa), but not promptly, that would be a terrible scene. Bullfighting is very unpopular in here (north of Portugal). Most closed, only in my city, Povoa de Varzim (the only standing, some want it closed), but now only a few per year, mostly for TV. When I was a kid, some yrs ago, we use to see bullfighting after going to the beach on sundays, cause its near the beach. Its more popular in southern Portugal and Azores. In Portugal was forbitten to kill the Bull in the Arena, now its authorized in a small town, Barrancos, because they have allways killed the animal. Even with police, TV, every year there was a scandal because no one was arrested. That was giving more fame to the town and to that "festa", the government authorized it (only) in there.Pedro 01:07, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

---

We need some more info or links where the Bulls are victorious by killing the human. RedWolf 06:18, Nov 14, 2003 (UTC)

A List of bullfighters killed by bulls? Paquirri, Manolete,... -- Error 04:51, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

Bulls are not "victorious" when they kill the bullfighter (who will be replaced by another bullfighter). Bulls are victorious when they are pardoned, after demonstrating great bravery and strength. I don't have any solid number, but this usually happens several times every season.

[alt.culture.bullfight FAQ] 4. What is an indulto ?

If a bull has shown exceptional bravery and the crowd petition the president of the bullring before it is killed, he will grant an indulto (pardon) and spare the bull's life. The kill is then simulated using a banderilla or an empty hand. The bull will usually then become a semental (stud bull).

--Felix3 23:20, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Are you serious? What was the bull guilty of in the first place to require a pardon from death? Also, does anyone have any recovery rate statistics of bulls who are 'pardoned'? I couldn't picture a bull living much of a life after a bullfight with numerous wounds to it's muscles, tendons and spine? Jachin 17:28, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Er. One wonders how much you know about animals. First of all, bulls or other animals cannot be guilty, as the concept of guilt implies the capacity for one to be responsible for their actions, something that only humans can do. So your semantic argument is unfounded. And second of all, before they are slain, the wounds bulls receive during a corrida are only superficial, and inflicted to fuel their anger and make them run after the picadores and the matador. It's all the running which exhausts them, not the wounds. Banderillas only stab a few centimeters under the skin; for a 600+kg animal, that is a mild cut. And finally, bulls which are bred for corridas leave a much happier life than their peers before the corrida, and after when they survive, since they recover in a matter of days/weeks, have sex with plenty of cows, and die of old age in some meadow where they are allowed to live out their life. LeoDV 14:40, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, LeoDV you really DO know a lot about animals and bullfighting. You've enlightened us all! I'll be jiggered. You musta been to plently of these little gatherings to know like, how far the pick thing goes into the bull's back. Or maybe you've spent time reading about it in the can which is where some people do their best reading. So it's the RUNNING that exhausts them, not the wounds.... oh, that's a helluva lot better. I mean, if they just killed it outright, well, that'd be less humane!! Instead, they RUN it to death! So that it BLEEDS to death! Looks like you've thought this one out real well. To the best of your ability, I'm sure. And you know LeoDV other than the fact you've got caca (that's Spanish for you- know- what) for brains, well.....other than that fact.....can't think of much else to say about ya old son! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.23.105.146 (talk) 05:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

When the bull wins

A Mexican friend of mine has described the outcome when the bull wins the fight: the bull retires to a life of ease and breeding. In this sense, he argues, bullfighting is fairer to the bull than a traditional slaughterhouse where the animal has no chance of survival. I don't have any particular view on this - but it would be interesting to see a subheading on the subject. Durova 22:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

This argument is quite common in Mexico, where the conditions in slaughterhouses are considered to be far worse than any fate which could befall a bull in a ring.

This is almost correct. In certain, very rare, circumstances when a bull has been unusually brave the crowd can petition the president of the Corrida to pardon the bull. In such a case the bull does live out a long life likely as a stud bull afterward.--Counsel 06:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Get real. The bull hardly ever wins. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.23.105.146 (talk) 05:43, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Normally, these bulls die during the transport —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.25.228.59 (talk) 18:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Toro de Fuego

The Fire Bull section does not belong here. The page Toro embolado (not Toro de fuego) is the one to look for. Jotamar (talk) 17:04, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Mexico

'The Brave One' - can the President of Mexico pardon a brave bull? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macadavy (talk • contribs) 08:15, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Ratón the widowmaker

Please see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spain#Ratón. We need an image! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:57, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

France Bull fighting

Bull Fighting also goes on in France. When I was four we went to France and my mum took me to see a bull fight. Is it now illegal, or nonexistant? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.82.230 (talk) 20:13, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

No, French bullfigthing culture is not illegal at all, it is well alive. It has even been recognised as a cultural patrimony. In Camargue (Arles, Nimes) it is a very important part of the local cultural identity. But bullfights axist in many other areas in France; Languedoc, but Also Aquitaine are the major reagions were bullfighing is deeply rooted. In those region a lot of cities and villages have their specific bullfighting arenas. Many famous international toreros are actually French. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.59.166 (talk) 20:14, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean with "international toreros"? In many contries bullfighting is illegal, so I really don't get your point. It actually only proves that some Spaniards - and some Frenchmen according to you - are heavily retarded. --178.197.225.253 (talk) 20:12, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Definition

Bullfighting is described as an event "in which one or more bulls are baited, and then killed in a bullring for the entertainment of the audience". However not all bullfights involve the death of the bull, for the entertainment of the audience or otherwise. The definition as it stands is not only incorrect, but seems rather POV and emotive.Royalcourtier (talk) 21:11, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

The case of Portugal, where bulls are not killed in the bullring, is already explained in the same paragraph. --Jotamar (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Becerrada

Just to avoid an edit war, I'm not deleting again the new section, Becerrada. However, the description given proves not having understood what a becerrada is, uses as source TV images of a particular event which are taken as if what they show is usual, and to cap it all uses words that are anything but neutral. That is, there are several reasons to delete the section, but let's see what other editors think of it. --Jotamar (talk) 16:13, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

As your explanation sounds reasonable, I have reverted my edit. Joefromrandb (talk) 22:50, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Elephant in the room

The bulls seem to be obsessed with attacking the cape, whereas it is the matador who is sticking lances in them and about to stab them with a sword. Now does anyone besides me think that that is somehow peculiar? Are the bulls trained to attack the cape? Somehow I don't think a wild water buffalo (for example) would be so distracted. Someone please treat this question in the article or make the treatment more prominent if it is already treated.CountMacula (talk) 14:52, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Are bulls trained to attack the cape?

Why do they attack the cape, and why don't they attack the matador?CountMacula (talk) 17:52, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

No, bulls are not trained to do anything. The bull will attack the cape because it is attracted to it's movement, so by shuffling slowly to the bull and in a non-threatning manner, the bull lets the torero close in, and then movement of the cape makes him charge it, simple as that.Bezerrada (talk) 15:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

NPOV in introduction section...

The intro section uses words like "nightmare" to describe the bullfight. This sensationalistic language (whether accurate or not) appears to promote a particular agenda and is therefore not in the best interest of an objective description of the cultural phenomenon of bullfighting.

Agreed. The section also uses improper citations (a link to the front page of Peta.org is not a proper citation) and the text is way too detailed and long to be inserted into the introduction. From a quick look at the article's history, DShantz seems to have been adding similar controversial edits since about 10 December 2014, which have been reverted many times. It would be more productive to resolve this through a dispute resolution than an edit war. Matoking (talk) 16:22, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Thankyou Matoking The details of an actual bullfight should be factually represented in an accurate and non-sensastional manner possible. I will take it upon myself to edit the text again, and also to update source referenced to have the full link.

I have been a longstanding contributor to Wikipedia (since 2006) and share in the interests of maintaining the value of the resource. The article concerns a controversial subject. There is going to be dispute, and the summary removal of all content on several occassions should not outweigh the contributions that amount to what I hope can become a fair and truthful account of this practice. DShantz / Magnity 04:20, 20 December 2014 (UTC)DShantzDShantz / Magnity 04:20, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Shouldn't the only source be http://www.stopbullfighting.org.uk/facts.htm

No, because that page is full of outright lies. The preparatiion of the bull is specially wrong and I have no idea how whoever wrote that got that information.Bezerrada (talk) 16:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Lead image

I propose that the lead image be changed to a photo of a bullfight. I am sure if there is consensus for this, there will be discussion as to which photo because of the controversial nature of bullfighting, however, I would like to reach consensus on this single issue first.DrChrissy ^(talk) 11:22, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Bullfighting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081102065003/http://www.typicallyspanish.com:80/news/publish/article_18648.shtml to http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_18648.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120402025219/http://www.aplausos.es:80/noticia/11153/Noticias/sevilla-blinda-toros.html to http://www.aplausos.es/noticia/11153/Noticias/sevilla-blinda-toros.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:02, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Type of Bulls?

Maybe I did not read well. But I miss a part about which type of bulls that are (traditionally) used. Kind regards, Timelezz (talk) 11:01, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

I've tried to amend that point. --Jotamar (talk) 15:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Religion

Jotamar seriously, are you really claiming bullfighting is not deeply linked to religion in Spain? Beyond the fact that there are dozens of sources backing this, it is so self evident I can't believe anyone who knows Spain (as you do) would deny it. Bullfights are consistently held as part of wider religious celebrations and expressions of devotion of local saints. San Fermín is the most obvious example, but the Fiestas de San Juan (Coria, Soria etc...), La Magdalena in Castellón, bous a la mar dedicated to the santísima sangre and a long etc of hundreds of localities. I cannot think of many Bullfighting fiestas in Spain which are secular and not involving religion (maybe the ones linked to the "Ferias" are exceptions). Its not a question of "some anthropologists think..." its a reality. The sheer magnitude of evidence of this link is so overwhelming that I think you should provide a source denying, if you are going to change the statement.Asilah1981 (talk) 18:09, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

That's it, there is no special link between Religion and bullfighting. Saying there is because the bullfights are held during the patron saint's celebrations is like saying there is a special link between football and religion because the games are played on sunday. It's awkward to try to explain this when any native Spaniard (and probably anyone from a Catholic country) would understand it immediately. One lame source is not going to change this. Asilah, your editions are getting dangerously close to OR lately, please be more collaborative and try to consider that perhaps other editors know some matters better than you do. --Jotamar (talk) 15:53, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Jotamar Noted on OR, you are right I have been too bold lately. I agree there are a large number of native Spaniards who would agree with you immediately (maybe the more modern, urban types). Others, those who are closer to the world of bullfighting - particularly in the south, would, in my experience, tend to disagree. In any case, this reminds me of a song I heard last year which happens to add value to this discussion. [4] Asilah1981 (talk) 21:23, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

You should redo the section, right now it's very exaggerated, not even your second-rate sources support the current wording. Save us from another edit war. --Jotamar (talk) 15:33, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Jotamar I would not call any of our discussions an edit war. By what I recall we have always been cordial with each other and engaged productively. Perhaps you are right it is a bit exaggerated. Perhaps you can go ahead and tone it down?, I won't contest. Main thing is I felt that the relation is noted, even if on a profane folkloric level. I find it much more relevant/interesting than any fatwa declared by some random cleric in x Muslim country, which was the prior focus of the section.Asilah1981 (talk) 15:39, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

If it were up to me, I would just erase all except the iconography part, as I did before. --Jotamar (talk) 15:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Ok, but can you just say they often take place in the context of local religious festivities celebrating patron saints? I mean we can't really deny that, no? Asilah1981 (talk) 17:03, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

There you are, my edition. --Jotamar (talk) 14:39, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Bullfighting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101220003155/http://www.cas-international.org:80/es/home/sufrimiento-de-toros-y-caballos/corridas-de-toros/corridas-de-toros-en-latinoamerica to http://www.cas-international.org/es/home/sufrimiento-de-toros-y-caballos/corridas-de-toros/corridas-de-toros-en-latinoamerica/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080625012822/http://iacuc.tennessee.edu/pdf/Policies-AnimalCare/Cattle-BasicCare.pdf to http://iacuc.tennessee.edu/pdf/Policies-AnimalCare/Cattle-BasicCare.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101109054022/http://www.league.org.uk:80/blogs_entry.aspx?id=117 to http://www.league.org.uk/blogs_entry.aspx?id=117
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110930072409/http://www.league.org.uk/content.asp?CategoryID=1938 to http://www.league.org.uk/content.asp?CategoryID=1938
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071015231912/http://www.news1130.com:80/news/international/article.jsp?content=w082258A to http://www.news1130.com/news/international/article.jsp?content=w082258A
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120330053829/http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_27265.shtml to http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_27265.shtml#ixzz10NKQxwpk
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101220010929/http://www4.elcomercio.com:80/2010-12-17/Home/Noticia-Principal/corridas-toros-referendum-(1).aspx to http://www4.elcomercio.com/2010-12-17/Home/Noticia-Principal/corridas-toros-referendum-%281%29.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:13, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Treatment of horses during bullfights

A petition on The Petition Site entitled "Ban the Uses of Horses in Bullfighting" says that horses are blindfolded, Vaseline put in their eyes, their vocal cords are mutilated, and cotton is put in their ears and nostrils. If anyone has a source of the truth of these claims, can you add the information (and source) to the article? DBlomgren (talk) 17:56, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Sport or not a sport, no element of competition

Asilah1981, Joefromrandb - Please discuss your difference of opinion here rather than via edit-warring. Asilah has stated that there is no dispute, clearly there is. Joe, in this edit you removed content on the basis that it was original research. It looks to me like you were focused on the "no elements of competition" claim, but that doesn't explain this removal of sourced content. I need someone to sack up here and start working toward consensus, please and in the interim, please leave this area of the article alone. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 09:42, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, let's see now... You're passively-aggressively edit-warring, you've locked the article (after, of course, reverting to your preferred version), and you've threatened to block me if I report your outrageous conduct at ANI. What is left to discuss, Dear Leader? Joefromrandb (talk) 10:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Joefromrandb I take you know little about bullfighting and have never been to a bullfight. Look for a list of Spanish, Mexican or Colombian sportsmen see if you find any bullfighters in there. Look in the website of the Spanish Sports Federation, see if you find it covers Bullfighting. Saying bullfighting is a sport or a competition is like saying Opera or Ballet is. Its a cultural event, most (actually all) aficionados would say an art-form. Its just ridiculous to take this line and we should not even be discussing this. The rationale that "torerros (sic) compete indirectly with each other" is surreal. Well so do ballet dancers, so do cooking Chefs, so do you probably in your work place. Just let it go, if its a topic you don't know anything about. Asilah1981 (talk) 12:22, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

It's OK. No one likes being proven wrong, I'm sure. As I said, if you don't like our policy on original research, you'll need to take that up at WT:NOR. Joefromrandb (talk) 13:30, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Joefromrandb The statement is sourced. I don´t know why you removed the source nor why you believe OR applies.Asilah1981 (talk) 15:38, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

No, it's not "sourced", and even if it were that doesn't guarantee inclusion. What you've provided is someone's opinion that people in Spanish-speaking countries don't consider it a sport (see WP:POVATTRIBUTE). That certainly doesn't mean that worldwide, bullfighting isn't considered a sport. Joefromrandb (talk) 18:46, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

I've no idea why that link is red; WP:ASSERT and WP:WikiVoice should be blue. We can't use Wikipedia's voice to state an opinion. It would be fine to say that people in the Spanish-speaking world don't consider it a sport, using in-text attribution, but flat-out declaring it isn't a sport is unacceptable. Also, Cyphoidbomb's ex cathedra lock of this article restored the words, "in the areas where it is practiced" after "considered a blood sport". This is absurd. People either consider it a blood sport or they don't, regardless of whether or not bullfighting takes place in their area. In fact, the areas where it is practiced are obviously places where at least some folks don't consider it a blood sport. Those seven words are unnecessary at best, and potentially confusing at worst. Joefromrandb (talk) 17:58, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Joefromrandb Ok if its an editing issue, no reason to argue. So long as it is clear that it is not considered a sport, its fine. People in Iran may consider the US to be the great satan, or people in Poland may consider Congolese people to be cannibals but such opinions do not merit inclusion in an article on the United States or the Republic of Congo. We do not want to fall victim to Anglo Bias, which is pervasive in English-language wikipedia by wilfully supporting ignorance (or post-truth as it is known nowadays). Asilah1981 (talk) 14:09, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Joefromrandb I hope this settles is. http://dle.rae.es/srv/search?m=30&w=tauromaquia The definition of bullfighting of the official dictionary of the Spanish language for the entire hispanic world. It is an art not a sport.Asilah1981 (talk) 04:49, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

First of all, you're talking about Spanish-style bullfighting; this is a very broad article that covers much, much more than that. Second, did you even look at the pages I blue-linked above this? I'd suggest reading WP:RS, and WP:NOR as well. Joefromrandb (talk) 19:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Joefromrandb Yes but most of the article is about Spanish-style bullfighting since it is the most well known and widely practiced, and so is the specific section we are discussing about. I am aware of WP:RS and WP:NOR that is why I pointed to the dictionary as a source. That's as reliable as it gets, right? I assume you have some proficiency in Spanish?Asilah1981 (talk) 03:21, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

I have added the RAE as a reliable sourceAsilah1981 (talk) 03:29, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Your dictionary definition says it's considered an art form, which the article already says. It does not say "it isn't a sport". Whether someone considers something a sport is a matter of personal opinion. Same with what constitutes "art". I can guarantee that PETA doesn't consider bullfighting a form of art. Joefromrandb (talk) 05:06, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Joefromrandb PETA is an (arguably extremist) activist organization, it considers eating a steak murder, which would hardly be relevant to the lead of a wikipedia article on Philadelphia Cheese Steaks. Such views can go in the criticism section, no issue there, they cannot be included in the lead defining what it actually is. Football in the dictionary is defined as a sport, ballet, painting and opera in the dictionary is defined as an art. Maybe ISIS might consider painting as a heresy and an outrage to their religion - again hardly relevant. Things are what they are, as defined by language, cultural context, those who practice it, those involved, those who partake in/know about it, relevant legislation etc... None of the above refer to it as a sport. The reason is quite obvious, it is not a sport nor understood as such according to any of the above. It is known as the "Fiesta Nacional" in Spain and the "Fiesta Brava" in Latin America - a festivity, it has been legislated to be cultural and historical patrimony of Spain and (briefly - later overturned) in France. It is arguably the most potent cultural icon of Spain - particularly central and southern Spain. There is no competition involved, since the outcome (the death of the bull) is a given, except when it displays certain characteristics in the way it fights and is forgiven and allowed to return to the wild. Spectators in bullfights don't cheer the bullfighter and boo the bull, they actually cheer and boo both for the same reasons which is unrelated to who is winning or who is losing. They watch the bullfight purely for its artistic and aesthetic value. A bull which fights badly or refuses to fight can lead to the specific fight being cancelled. All that is required from the bullfighter is to come to close to his own death as possible without losing ground and to kill cleanly without unnecessary suffering for the bull. This is what I mean by there being no competition involved. One thing I could perhaps agree with you are "recortes" (google it): this perhaps can be seen as a sport.

In any case, instead of arguing about this point we should be looking at the overall structure of this article which is awful. It is not clear whether it is referring to Spanish bullfighting or general bull-related events. I think we would be able to look at this more productively together if we changed the definition (and maybe name of the article) and referred to it as a wide range of activities involving bulls, the most famous of which is Spanish-style bullfighting, and, in their different varieties can be characterized as festivites, art-forms, sports etc... This is the main issue of the article and it would be easier for us to work and come to agreement from this angle. A Rodeo for example is definitely a sport, and it should be covered more prominently in this article. Thats why I started new discussion below Asilah1981 (talk) 06:44, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting that PETA's views on bullfighting be included anywhere in the article. I'm just pointing out that art is a matter of the beholder's taste. Joefromrandb (talk) 14:19, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

JoefromrandbYeah agreed. But think, many people find that modern art is not art, its just garbage. Like that guy who canned his own shit and called it a work of art to be displayed in galleries. I understand people find bullfighting horrible and not to their taste, but no one sees it as a sport except people who are unaware of what it is. Anyways, I suggest some kind of rewrite of the entire article, not by me, but generally... I continue in next section.Asilah1981 (talk) 16:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Merge with Spanish style bullfighting?

Separating the two doesn't make sense. 95% of this article is about Spanish style bullfighting. Course landaise is not really bullfighting and there is no reason having jallikatu and rodeos together. Either that or we we change the name of the article to something which does not refer specifically to Spanish style bullfighting so overtly.Asilah1981 (talk) 03:41, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Maybe instead of merging the two, I suggest renaming the article. When people think bullfighting they immediately think of Spanish-style bullfighting, so we are redirecting readers to the wrong article. This article should be called something less "Spanish oriented" and the content regarding Spanish-style bullfighting should be vastly cut down and moved to the relevant article. The question is what to rename the article to... Asilah1981 (talk) 16:10, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

If you're going to propose merging the content, you should consider putting {{merge to}} and {{merge from}} templates on the respective pages so that readers know that there is a merge proposal. If your concern is that there is too much focus on Spanish bullfighting, you could just reshape the article so that it's more generic and focused on international styles of bull fighting/wrestling/riding, etc. I think readers reasonably expect to see a general article, so I don't know that a total merger would get a lot of support. And if you renamed the article to something generic like "Bull sports", I think you should expect backlash on the basis that such a title sounds euphemistic. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:05, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

This general article on bullfighting should not disappear, however, I feel its current bias towards Spanish-style bullfighting should be addressed, especially because this already has its own main article. This bias is apparent in the lead, and the extremely detailed content in the main body. Having said that the Spanish-style bullfighting is woefully short of references and these frequently require further details. To my mind, we need to move (I mean move and delete, not just copy) relevant details from this article to the Spanish-style bullfighting article, thereby improving both. DrChrissy ^(talk) 21:46, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

I would support keeping this as the most general "bullfighting" article for all countries/cultures, but generalize the lede, and as needed move excess Spanish-specific materials to the Spain-centric article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:22, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb I understand your point about being euphemistic but could a rodeo be classified as bullfighting? Its within the scope of the article but is not bullfighting as such... I wasn't thinking of bull sports. Something else, but I still haven't worked out what term we could use...Asilah1981 (talk) 02:58, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

How about Taurine Spectacles or Spectacles with Bulls?Asilah1981 (talk) 03:24, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Im not sure if "Spectacle" is widely understood in English though, I am more fluent in French than English and the former distorts the latter at times.Asilah1981 (talk) 03:30, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

I am totally against changing the title of this article. I doubt any reader in the English-speaking world would start a search on bullfighting at "Taurine spectacles" as the vast, vast majority would not even know the word Taurine. However, what we perhaps need to change is the definition (and subsequently the lead and text content). I suggest the opening sentences should be "Bullfighting involves humans attempting to publicly subdue, immobilise or kill a bull, usually according to a set of rules, guidelines or cultural expectations. Although people commonly think of Spanish-style bullfighting as representative of bullfighting, there are many different forms and varieties in various locations around the world." What do people think? DrChrissy ^(talk) 18:06, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Taurine spectacles?

Chicken spectacles

Agree with MatthewVanitas and DrChrissy – keep this article, with this name, make it a more balanced overview of all kinds of bull-fighting by moving excess Spanish-style content to the dedicated article for that sport. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:37, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Concur with above comments that we should keep the main article at "Bullfighting" as the most commonly understood term, and take a stance in the lede as to what activities count as bullfighting, leaving it as broad as practical to incorporate many traditions. And again move a portion of the Spanish-centric content to the other article so that the article has more balance between different cultures of bullfighting. Spanish bullfighting is the most famous, so I'm not saying it has to be reduced to a tiny portion of the article, just saying it should be proportional. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with everyone. Frankly, at this stage any change is for the better. It looks like we are all on the same page regarding what the problem is, even if there are equally valid alternative solutions.Asilah1981 (talk) 11:54, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

User:DrChrissy One slight problem with your proposed definition. Not all bull-related events involve inmobilizing, subduing or killing the bull. The Course Landaise featured on the article doesn't. Neither do Recortes (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullfighting#Recortes), nor bullfights involving bull against bull, nor do many of the other bull related events such as Jallikatu, encierros (like Pamplona) or toros embolados. The definition has to be significantly wider!Asilah1981 (talk) 13:23, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

I have been bold and redefined the article. Happy to discuss this (perhaps in a new thread). I have kept the re-definition broad to include the concerns of Asilah above - although I have my doubts these forms are actually "bullfighting". DrChrissy ^(talk) 18:46, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Good job!Asilah1981 (talk) 04:09, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Unsupported claim

Hi,Jeofromrandb As far as I know, the claim that 'French [...] cities and regions have started to formally declare their celebrations of bullfighting part of their protected cultural patrimony' is erroneous. Can you please provide material supporting your assertion? Thanks.--Roze Chaplain (talk) 04:48, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't need to. It's already in the article. Joefromrandb (talk) 00:00, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

@Joefromrandb: Roze is less likely to benefit from a snippy response than from an actual reference, and it technically is your burden to provide the source, since you restored the content. The only reference in proximity to the disputed phrasing is this and I don't see any mention of France. So if you're aware of another reference in the article that supports the content, it would be appreciated if you'd please provide it, otherwise Roze may feel free to remove the content again on the basis that it is not properly sourced. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:36, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Well, Cyphoidbomb, you have made it clear that your opinion is the be all and end all of this article. You've already abused your tools here once & then threatened to block me if I complained about your misconduct. Consider any and all objections withdrawn. I humbly apologize for not clearing my edits with you first. Joefromrandb (talk) 05:37, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, Cyphoibomb.

@Joefromrandb: To me, a fact is not an opinion.--Roze Chaplain (talk) 06:39, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

You needn't worry about minor nuisances like "facts" here anyway. Now that you have Cyphoidbomb on your side, you're untouchable. If Cyphoidbomb likes your edits, he will lock the page in that version, and threaten to block anyone who complains about it. He's done it before. Congratulations. You're home free. Reality be damned. Joefromrandb (talk) 06:54, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

@Joefromrandb: I am very sympathetic to "ugh, I made a mistake and was snippy on top of it...awkwaaard" but if you're seriously trying to blow this up into some ridiculous persecution scenario, you're really shortchanging Roze, a brand new editor who was thoughtful enough to seek clarification after the revert rather than edit-warring. If this is a saving-face situation, I get it, but I'm not here to kick dirt in your grill. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:52, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

"Trying to blow it up"? No. Please don't think that means I've forgotten what took place at this article. I'm sure Roze is a fine editor who means well. That does nothing to change the fact that you previously edited this article extensively and then locked it. I personally think it takes some huevos grandes to lecture me about conduct, let alone at this article. It's easy for you to refer to a "ridiculous persecution scenario"; you're the one with the admin tools. Have I been following you around, complaining about what took place here? No, I have not. I dropped it. I realize you're infallible. I realize I'll never have any avenue of rejoinder to address what took place here, but accusing me of playing the victim while not acknowledging even the smallest measure of error on your part is really not cool. Roze, I'm glad you want to be a part of improving this encyclopedia. I appreciate your desire and your efforts. My issues with Cyphoidbomb are my issues. Please don't think they extend to you in any way, and please don't be dissuaded from being a part of this worthwhile project. Joefromrandb (talk) 05:16, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Since you've not bothered to support your reversion, I think it's safe to assume your position was legitimately erroneous and Roze's edit was legitimately sound. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:38, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Whatever you say. Joefromrandb (talk) 05:47, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Bullfighting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110605140518/http://www.worldstadiums.com/north_america/countries/mexico/central_mexico.shtml to http://www.worldstadiums.com/north_america/countries/mexico/central_mexico.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100511090201/http://www.itla.net/index.cfm?sec=Longhorn_Information&con=handling to http://www.itla.net/index.cfm?sec=Longhorn_Information&con=handling
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.league.org.uk/blogs_entry.aspx?id=117
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111007040211/http://www.tanuvas.tn.nic.in/nea/docs/AnGR_of_TN.pdf to http://www.tanuvas.tn.nic.in/nea/docs/AnGR_of_TN.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713184540/http://asp.las-ventas.com/noticias/noticia_detalle.asp?codigo=1126&codigo_seccion=7 to http://asp.las-ventas.com/noticias/noticia_detalle.asp?codigo=1126&codigo_seccion=7
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140904005151/http://www.fuerzapublica.go.cr/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/09/Reglamento-Actividades-Taurinas-N%C2%B0-19183-G-S-.pdf to http://www.fuerzapublica.go.cr/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/09/Reglamento-Actividades-Taurinas-N%C2%B0-19183-G-S-.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/tamil-nadu-governor-signs-ordinance-for-jallikattu/articleshow/56703340.cms
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/jallikattu-tamil-nadu-assembly-passes-bill-to-amend-pca-act/articleshow/56738068.cms

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:05, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Bullfighting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924095056/http://www.salamanca24horas.com/toros/107982-la-tauromaquia-bien-de-interes-cultural-en-castilla-y-leon to http://www.salamanca24horas.com/toros/107982-la-tauromaquia-bien-de-interes-cultural-en-castilla-y-leon
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924095056/http://www.salamanca24horas.com/toros/107982-la-tauromaquia-bien-de-interes-cultural-en-castilla-y-leon to http://www.salamanca24horas.com/toros/107982-la-tauromaquia-bien-de-interes-cultural-en-castilla-y-leon
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121029022313/http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_32664.shtml to http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_32664.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090324042443/http://www.bullfightingfreeeurope.org/ to http://www.bullfightingfreeeurope.org/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090126084718/http://english.stieren.net/index.php?id=390 to http://english.stieren.net/index.php?id=390
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.avui.cat/cat/notices/2009/12/llum_verda_a_la_supressio_de_les_corrides_de_toros_a_catalunya_81775.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170126115359/http://newstodaynet.com/chennai/awbi-withdraw-plea-against-tn-jallikattu-law to http://newstodaynet.com/chennai/awbi-withdraw-plea-against-tn-jallikattu-law

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:13, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Fallacies

I'm all for including arguments on both sides of a debate, but I think an article shouldn't include logically fallacious arguments, such as: "Other arguments include that the death of animals in slaughterhouses is very often worse than the death in the ring, and that both types of animal die for entertainment since humans do not need to consume meat, eating it instead for taste (bulls enter the food chain after the bullfight)". This merely implies that killing animals for food (taste) is just as wrong as killing them for entertainment in bullfighting, but does not say anything about the moral permissibility of bullfighting. Can this be reworked? Highflyer Hank (talk) 11:26, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

It's not just a fallacy but based on an obvious lie; no secular developed country allows for painful deaths of animals for food production. Not only is causing suffering unnecessary but it also reduces the quality of the meat. Of 19 (talk) 00:40, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Pre-fight abuse

Found this info (below) with a circulating Facebook photo of a dying bull in a bullfight. I don't think the Wikipedia article covers it all currently.

Maybe you didn't know that..... Before the bullfight, the bull is kept in the dark, is beaten on the kidneys with sandbags and is given powerful purges (sometimes even drugs) to weaken its forces. The Horns are cut off to make them more sensitive to pain. His eyes are greased with Vaseline to decrease his sight, and he's stuffing cotton in his nostrils so he can barely breathe. He is sprinkled with searing acid on his legs, and pins are lodged in his testicles to make him shake and counter his natural meekness. When the bull arrives in the arena, he is nothing but a terrified animal desperately seeking an exit. The first torturers to enter the scene are the "Picadors" that from the top of a horse will throw a spear into the neck of the bull so that he can destroy his muscles and tendons that allow him to raise his head. This causes the bull very intense pain, severe bleeding and devastation of internal organs. The horses of the "Picadors" are also victims: stuffed with sedatives, with severed vocal cords and fitted with blinders are pushed into danger. The Mat that should protect them sometimes is not enough, and the horse is literally disemboweled by the bull's horns, or reports fractures during falls. Then there are the " Banderilleros " who plant 6-8-Inch Harpoons in the wound caused by the " picador ". these harpoons, embedded in the neck of the bull, serve to rip the meat out of every movement. The famous " Muleta " (the red rag that is shaken in front of the bull) has as its sole purpose to disorient and tire the bull, so that he lower his head and the " Matador " can disorient his sword. Contrary to what is thought, its red color does not serve to excite the bull (like most animals see in black and white) but to mask the blood spatter that impressionerebbero the audience. Finally comes the "Matador" which in theory should put an end to the agony of the animal with a single stroke of sword, lodged between the shoulder blades, to the heart. But that never happens. After two, four, six sword strokes, the dying bull with punctured lungs, and the devastated interior complains painfully, vomiting blood. It will then be finished with the "Puntilla" a short dagger that will atrophy his spinal cord. If "Puntilla" does not completely cut the marrow but only hurts it, the bull remains paralyzed but conscious. Still alive, until a few years ago, he was cut off ears and tail, trophies of an unjust victory; then he will be dragged out of the arena to the slaughterhouse, where he will be cut to pieces. The approximately 20.000 bulls victims every year of bullfighting are only a small part of the animals nato in Spain for pure fun masked by the alibi of "tradition". Torture is not culture!!!

I did some looking around and found some of it covered by these searches and sources:

• Google search: bullfights bull is kept in the dark, is beaten on the kidneys.
• Last Chance for Animals - Bullfighting.
• Bullfighting: The Facts.
• Bullfighting | PETA.

Hopefully, someone with more time than me will put some of this info in the article, and will find more sources. --Timeshifter (talk) 13:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC) --Timeshifter (talk) 13:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

30% of the Spanish population actively follow bullfighting?

What is the source for that? I seriously doubt it. According to the last official statistical study from the government I could find, 9.5% attended a bullfighting event in Spain in the year 2015, and 17% watched one on TV/internet (very probably including the 9,5% that attended one). And I don't think one should call all of them "active followers".

https://www.mecd.gob.es/dam/jcr:d8a1f8b0-5145-4d1b-82ef-8c1b563a8e80/Asuntos_taurinos_2017.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.107.94.192 (talk) 07:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Eating the bull

When I was in a village in Spain, the bull that was part of a "bloodless bullfight" at the village fiesta was butchered. Within a few hours it reappearred as some rather good stew. This was provided free to anyone in the town, as the bullfight was part of the (publicly funded) fiesta. (Anon.)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.202.27.66 (talk • contribs) 2004-06-08T15:22:02 (UTC)

This is precisely what happens to the sacrificed bull in Greco-Roman cult. Wetman 21:32, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC) Well (aron) the bull is slaughtered and donated as charity in Mexico to the local orphanages and "soup kitchens" but in spain the bull is slaughtered and sold.

It's a pity that people can't put a gaur in to fight in place of the bull.

http://www.arkive.org/species/GES/mammals/Bos_frontalis/Bos_frontalis_00.html

If the gaur dies, then its meat will be ten times more delicious than normal bull's. But that would be impossible, all matadors may die within 10 secs, for it's too huge and fast.

Moot

. Nothing to do here. Normal Op (talk) 22:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

When was bullfighting banned in the USA?

Bullfighting in the Spanish style was quite popular in the American West in the 19th century, but by the 1920s was illegal. The bloodless bullfights in California became legal within the last 20 years, as they largely occur in small towns which had continued to hold conventional, illegal bullfights long after bullfighting became illegal. The bloodless corrida was legalized as a way of preserving local traditions in the state's rural areas, if I remember correctly. Documentation would be welcomed.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.231.176.123 (talk • contribs) 2005-08-20T18:23:21 (UTC)

 Verified  Done It's already in the article under "Bans". Normal Op (talk) 23:17, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Origins

Well, for one there is a sentence in it that doesn't make much sense. Secondly, no one is quite sure or even relatively sure what happened in crete. what we have are some tantalizing but unfortunately vague murals etc. Is it bull leaping? Or are the 'leapers' being gored, sacrificed the bull? Is it ritualistic? Are the paintings merely symbolic? Ok. Thirdly, with that note, I highly doubt you can trace bullfighting back to crete. Yes. They had something go on with bulls. But it is highly doubtful that there is even an indirect connection between the minoans and this sort of bullfighting. I mean, randomly, if I had to guess, I'd say that a connection to the venationes of Rome and its empire...

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Novium (talk • contribs) 2006-01-28T08:19:50 (UTC)

 Done Added wikilink to Bull-leaping and added it to the See also under Styles of bullfighting. Normal Op (talk) 23:24, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

I added Matadors and edited Bandarilheiros

I added Matadors as they are still part of a Portuguese Style bullfight, although they are not always present.

I edited this and moved it below the "Matadors"

• Bandarilheiros - Akin to the Spanish matadores (see above), but without the sword. These men simply play the bull with a red coat.

I re-wrote it to say that they are the Matadors and Cavaleiros helper. Which they are. Their sole purpose is to help the Matadors and Cavaleiros in the arena by moving, distracting, and placing the bull elsewhere in the arena so that the Cavaleiro or Matador can position themselves.

I would also note that they (Bandarilheiros) are not part of the "three main events" noted by someone. Whoever wrote that don't know what they were talking about.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pebs96 (talk • contribs) 2006-06-07T08:54:02 (UTC)

 Requesting immediate archiving... Long since done and noted. Archive this. Normal Op (talk) 23:29, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Descabello

Does not the descabello pierce the cerebellum instead of the spinal cord? Isn't it akin to garrote (or garrote vil, I mean the non-suffocating variant)?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.20.17.84 (talk • contribs) 2006-11-23T10:43:10 (UTC)

Checked. The French article for descabello says it pierces the Medulla oblongata. The Spanish article says it severs the spinal cord between the first cervical vertebrae. A Wiktionary definition of descabello doesn't clarify. Probably both methods/positions will kill the bull quicker than exsanguination. I don't think we need to clarify either method further in the article. I think the point in the article was that bleeding out takes longer than is desirable, and piercing/severing the spinal column near the brain, or part of the brain, is a quicker and more humane death. Normal Op (talk) 22:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)