Talk:Gävle goat: Difference between revisions

This article was nominated for deletion on August 24th, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Comments

Lets give the Gävle goat a proper article. It's already world famous! People talk about the goat in example USA, China and part of Europe.....Someone nominated it for deletion, a beginners mistake. There is tonnes of fact about this "burning" goat.......It deserve it's place on Wikipedia! FreddyFred 12:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I have to apologise for the nomination for deletion - I come from the UK and it just isn't famous there, so when I saw a newly-created article about a giant stuffed goat.... well, i leapt to conclusions. Sorry. - Blood red sandman 18:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

2009 goat?

Any information about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.115.235.175 (talk) 11:39, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

2006 status?

Looking for news stories about the burning of the Natural Science Club's goat sometime after Dec 15, as noted in the timeline:

2006 On the night between the 14 and 15 of December at 03.00, someone tried to set fire to the goat by dousing the right front leg in petrol. The red ribbon on that leg got mildly burned and fell of. The lower part of the right leg got scorched, but the rest of the goat failed to light. The leg got fixed in the morning. [20] [21] The Natural Science Club's goat gets burned a couple of days later.

Misterbisson 18:36, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Updated, added references and pictures. Stefan 20:03, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

"War of Yule Goats"

The merchants diden't start building their goats in 1986 again because the "realised the value" of having a Yule Goat. They got pissed off because a couple of young student with hardly any budget could build and erect a monster sized goat, and the students made the merchants look "bad" in the eyes of the citizens of Gävle for spending all that money on a "professional" goat that still never made it into the Guiness Book of World Records. FreddyFred 07:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, that is the same thing in a less polictically correct language, the merchants stopped building the goat since it cost to much, when they realised that it was good value from a commercial point of view to build it even if it was burned they started again. The reference for it beeing small is "Den var inte stor och den var inte dyr men den skapade glädje för gävleborna" [1] translated to english (which I guess you do not need) "It was not large and it was not expensive but it created joy for the citizens of Gävle". It was very small, I have heard the story of how it was made, my guess is that it was less than 2m high, probably 1-1.5m. I think you are writing the story from the Söders köpmäns POV, I think NF should be more prominently described, IMHO the article is very much POV for Söders köpmän and not talking of NF enough, either the article should describe their contribution in the main history flow, since they are very much part of the history, or if you really want to split the text up in one history part and one "The Gävle Goat Vs Vasaskolans (the School of Vasa) Yule Goat" the at least put their contribution in that lead section and do not talk about 2 goats as the first part. Talk about them as NF not vasa school, the rest of the school have nothing to do with the goat, it is a NF initiative and nothing else, the school does not sponsor the goat, the rest of the students does not take part, it is a NF event only. It is not a NF vs Gävle goat, NF wanted to continue the tradition, and when Södersköpmän continued also they did not stop, it was a competition for 1-2 years to build the largest, but that have stopped now. I will update the article now more to my liking, but I do not want a revert war, if you revert me again, I will back of, but I do not like this article as it is now, I think it is very much POV. Stefan 13:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't like the new version, it is repetitive and artificially separates chronological events. It introduces the frequent burning in the main history which somewhat detracts from the effect in the second section. I don't think it was particularly POV before, but perhaps a little unbalanced. I suggest reverting it back to the old layout and rewriting it without the emphasis on a "main goat". By the way, congratulations to the article for surviving AFD (let's hope nobody burns it down unofficially). Yomangani^talk 15:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Then revert, I did not intend to do that big change, but I could not add the NF taking over and them carrying on the tradition the way the articel was, this way I could keep most of the text and just reorganizing it. I think that the 15 years that NF keept the tradition up should be more prominent in the text than it was. Stefan 15:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I saw what you were trying to do. I'll have a look later and see if I can rearrange the old layout to be fairer (then you can criticise my version! :) ). Do you have any photos of any of the NF goats? They would make a good addition (or, of course, the "holy grail" photo for this article - a burning or burnt goat). Yomangani^talk 16:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I should have some old papar photos of the NF goat (non burning), but they are kind of inaccessable now, I will try to get hold of them later, but expect it to be months before I can do that, and they are black and white. Stefan 23:16, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the It's NF (from the school of Vasa) that builds the goat, and not the other students. So that should be empahsized. First of all, the information I collected was from from all the media coverage a could find that adds to the story, and info of the goats and they are 99,9% focusing on the Gävle Goat (wich is now the official name of Söders Köpman's goat). And that is the goat that has been getting the publicity from the mid-nineties. So I'm not taking any stand in the article, I did my best to balance it without it losing it's charm(i definetly don't see the article as POV, I made it much, much, much less POV than all the news reports did, and I tried to give the NF:s goat the acknowledge it deserves). And the official Yule goat in Sweden (and the world) is the Gävle Goat. Also what I'm aware of the students dosen't have that type of expensive security or webcams watching their goat 24/7. So these days they don't really are competing with eachother. My intet was to Emphasize on the "main" goat, the Gävle Goat, but as I whent thru the information I had it turned out the NF's goat had have a big part in the wacky story of the Yule Goats. So I included all the info I had on them and merge it into the article. But I think the goats are 2 different goats, that's why I put them in the order I did from the beginning. And it was much more comprehensive that way. The Gävle Goat, being emphazised in world press, dominating the article, but include the NF goat, because it's higly notable for it's 2 world records and that the students actually ereted it from 1971-1985, keeping the timline of the goat without breaking it. Trust me, I whent thru the material exstensivley and included all that is of meaning and contributes to the article, I still have some details I'm not shure of, but my plan is to e-mail the city of gävle and NF to ask them questions. If you guys have questions post the here and I'll forward them when I finally e-mail them (in like a month). Then I have to say that the article was not intended to be read as a artificial pieace. This story of the goats it self is pretty funny and sometimes borderline surreal. And when I wrote it I tried to catch that feeling in the bounderies of Wikipedia standars for an article, then Yomangani edited it and it got more wikified without losing it's original touch. Now the article lost it's string of humor and touch (according to me) and it's not so comprehensive because it got to choped-up. I aprriceate the effort to rearrange it, but it got more complicated than it had to be. I must say, I don't wont this article to turn into an edit war either, but I'm letting Yomangani take the decision of what to do, I wont try to rearrange or anything untill I hopfully get some vital information from NF and the city itself and solve some gaps in the article. I agree that the lead need to be reworded though, maybe shortend again..........Stefan, I don't mistrust that you have knowledge about the goat, but I need more reliable numbers just for the credibility of the article, again, thats what I hope an e-mail would solve....... FreddyFred 22:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, as I said I will not make this into a revert war either, and I certanly trust Yomangani to do any changes. I understand that you got most info from the press, I have read most of the press about the goat for the last 20 years and they rarely speak of NF's goat, but now in wikipedia I can actually make a difference and would like to make NF a bigger part of the story than the press usually makes them, they have made goats every year since 1971, they have made goats 10 years more than Söders Köpmän, there would be no goat tradition if they did not do what they have done. I'm fine with anyone reverting the article, BUT I think that NF's part should be told in a more prominent place than it was, the story on how they build goats for 15 years and keept the tradition alive is a central part of the story, especially in a encyclopedia that does not live by selling issues. Stefan 23:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I've rearranged the original layout slightly, bringing the Natural Science Club's version into a more prominent position in the history and hopefully maintained the dry humour which encouraged me to work on it in the first place. Let me know what you think. (I'm not sure whether the timeline needs a bit of work to indicate which goat is which, but I think that introduces problems as the official timeline isn't always clear). Yomangani^talk 23:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I think the layout is good for now. Then when we have more info on NF:s goat we merge it into the text as much as possible. If we had 50-50 info on both goats it would of course be possible to do a more balanced article. But already now the NF:s goat is a big part of the article and once again, as their is more info (on both goats) we merge it into the text. I don't favor one goat myself, I just love the over all Yule Goat history in Gävle, it makes me smile everytime I read thru it, the story is pretty bizarre! One problem, as mentioned before, is that sometimes sources state different things, like the official timeline or the cost of the goat. I guess we in cases like that we just have to seek out the infor there is avaliable and then take a stand what is, as example, the right length, hight, cost etc. As I said earlier, a couple of e-mails may solve many of our questions............And I'm very curios about the diffrent names NF seems to have given their goats during the years (like the "Racer Goat"), that could be something funny to merge into the article/timeline one day  :) FreddyFred 04:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'm fine with this version, sorry if I upset you Freddy, that was not my intentions, I also love the story but I just get so upset when the story is told every year without any mention of NF who maintained the tradition for 15 years. Here I have a chance to make sure the correct story gets told, so I did. Good work! thanks! (and to you to Yomangani). I made some slight updates, and there should be more removal of redundancies, but I dare not do it :-) Stefan 13:40, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I've added a statistics table based on the info from the City Guide (which may not be entirely accurate), which clearly shows that the NF have built more goats and their goats have a better survival rate. I agree that some of the NF's themed goats sound interesting, especially if we can get some pictures - the mathematical one sounds like it would make a good addition to the article at some point too. Yomangani^talk 14:17, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

The statistics chart is comprehensive and fun. Especially the one that says "Number of goats run over". I found out that Gefle Dagblad Online has archives going back to 2002. There was alot of useful info regarding the history of the goats. I've merge some into the text, but could probably bee able to merge even more later. The story of the goat is like a big puzzel, you find bits and pieces here and there....Already it looks like this article has turned out to be the most comprehensive and "correct" info about the goats so far, both in Swedish and English..... FreddyFred 18:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Well

This is hilarious, and I'm not doubting its notability, but the article needs a bit of cleanup for tone, and the table surely has to go - "Yule Goat survival in Gävle" != a sensible table heading, however funny it is... 78.86.18.55 (talk) 15:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

While I understand what you are getting at, it's literally my favorite part of the article, and I smiled when I read it just now. If there's a standard of NPFW (no place for whimsey) on Wikipedia, then perhaps just changing the title of the table could work... Beetlecat (talk) 18:50, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I think it is fine as it is. The whole article strays somewhat from the house style, but the MoS is only a guideline, and the occasional article written with a light-hearted tone doesn't do anybody any harm. The tone matches the subject here while still presenting the facts. I'd hate to see this article emasculated in the name of conformity. Yomangani^talk 19:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

404

Near the end of the article is a stale reference to a web page: http://www.indek.kth.se/burningbock/ Sven Bergvall and Jacob Östberg. Firebranding Gävle. Burning Bock - the Videography. — a videography of "the Gävleners’ relation to Christmas, the bock and its destruction"

Rather than deleting it, I'll allow someone whose command of Swedish is better than mine to navigate around the KTH website and try to find the lost page.

My own goats are not troubled by fire because they are not made of straw. Perhaps a live Julbock could better defend itself. Snezzy (talk) 00:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Capitalization

The page is called Gävle goat, while the spelling inside the article is (almost) consistently "Gävle Goat". Could people make up their minds about the spelling, please? Shall I move it to Gävle Goat, or change the spelling in the text to a consistent "Gävle goat"? What do people think? Myself, I prefer moving to Gävle Goat (currently a redirect), since it's a proper name, and "Goat" is thus one half of a proper name. Not that I feel strongly about the spelling either way... anything that's consistent will do me. Inconsistency looks a little amateurish. Bishonen | talk 23:46, 27 December 2008 (UTC).

Julbocken

Timeline 2009: Another act of vandalism was attempted, but the suspect was apprehended before the act could be carried out. "You simply don't wear pearls with plaid!", the suspect was quoted as saying as he was taken away by police. Jhendin (talk) 02:02, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Why is this on the main page "in the news"?

Someone burned down a straw goat in Sweden - why on earth does this matter to anyone outside of Sweden (or even many IN Sweden) in the slightest? It wasn't terrorism, it wasn't vandalism of anything truly noteworthy, and it isn't even interesting. Just because some newspaper featured it on a slow news day (is it any wonder newspapers are dying out?) doesn't make it notable. Someone do us a big favor and remove this from the main page. Baron von HoopleDoople (talk) 02:21, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Seems newsworthy to me. --122.107.86.213 (talk) 03:07, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Culturally interesting, IMO, and "in the news" for better or worse. :) Admittedly, though, it might have been /more/ newsworthy had it been run over for the first time in 30+ years rather than just burned down again (good luck, guys, you'll need a tank nowadays). Goat burning in Sweden is in no danger of becoming passé, though, it seems. Goat Jul! David. Harami2000 (talk) 04:41, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, this thing is as tall or taller than a house! Burning down a 43 foot tall sculpture is pretty conspicuous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.167.116.136 (talk) 04:44, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

I fully endorse this being on the front page. It's Christmas, and this article has got to be the funniest thing I've ever read on Wikipedia. That timeline is amazing, and it even comes complete with goat survival statistics. Lighten up man, the year's almost over. Steamroller Assault (talk) 08:54, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree. It's not worthy of an article at all. If it really is then I can think of one giant buffalo statue in my community that would warrant an article[2]. NorthernThunder (talk) 10:08, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

It's already been kept because it's deemed notable, the notability isn't just that its a big goat but the tradition of trying to burn it down every year. chandler 15:14, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protect?

It seems that some people hate this goat so much, even some hackers that did a DDOS-attack on some webcams. Would it be a good idea to do a semi-protection so we avoid further vandalism? DavidHøstbo (talk) 11:34, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

The attack seem to have been to block the webcams during the acto to protect the identity of the burners rather than a goal of vandalism in itself. I think this page is safe. 81.170.129.81 (talk) 18:45, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Why the hate?

After skimming this article, I got the impression that the vandals try to burn down or otherwise vandalize the goat just for fun, but after reading this talk page, I'm starting to think that there are some people who really do hate everything about this goat. Why? Could it be that they are anti-Christmas/Christianity, or, are they hyper-Christians who are against any and all elements of originally pagan symbolism (and of course, probably associate the veneration of the goat with "satanism")? Or are they just US-centric[3] cultural imperialists who want only topics that they deem important or newsworthy here on Wikipedia? Shanoman (talk) 17:31, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

It's just youngsters having a laugh, this is at least the impression I've gotten over the years. It's always youngsters who probably see it as a feather in their cap... its not anti-Christian, Yule in Sweden isn't really about Christianity. (Or you were probably talking about people commenting on this talk page) chandler 23:10, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

The early buring might have had some kind of motif for the vandalism, but the later burnings have become a "thing" in itself, a vandal tradition of sorts.

81.170.129.81 (talk) 18:44, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I just hate that !@#$%ing goat. Burn, goat. Burn. Cowicide (talk) 00:09, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Building permit required?

How long does it usually take to build one of these goats?

Can someone upload a picture of the goat in the middle of construction?

I can go one better - reference 2 now takes you to a video showing the construction of the goat BurmeseCatMan (talk) 13:36, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Is there a municipal code restricting the building of these goats to particular times of the year? Dexter Nextnumber (talk) 22:19, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Updates and potential improvements

I'm responsible for the edits on 6th, 8th, and 13th February but forgot my user account password. Next on my list of things to do is improve the Social Media section that I created and check that all links are still valid.BurmeseCatMan (talk) 12:50, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

All dead links updated BurmeseCatMan (talk) 13:36, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Timeline

Perhaps the timeline could be trimmed to only indicate years in which something happened. There is particularly limited usefulness in a list of years in which nothing happened to a straw goat.--Jeffro77 (talk) 02:11, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

images

I think the images should be trimmed as several of them are essentially the same. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:06, 1 December 2012 (UTC)