Talk:Cow (Mario)

Will likely AfD

While the page is under construction, so I will wait for it to be completed first, I'm more than likely going to AfD this article for failing WP:GNG. While it has quite a bit of WP:REFBOMBing, it's just that. It's not a character who is standalone notable outside of being a character list entry. Besides the complete lack of characterization, the vast majority of sources are VALNET, listicles/trivial mentions, or primary interviews. There was the whole PETA brouhaha, but that's basically giving a massively WP:FRINGE view free advertising. It's undue to mention it for more than, like, one sentence. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:28, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

You're claiming the vast majority of sources are valnet...but only XDA and ScreenRant seem to be. The rest are full articles discussing the thing. There are some lists used, but they seem to be few and far between. There's a valid reaction and examination of player response, design analysis, and controversy. Out of this the one thing I would consider removing is the paragraph about suspected cannibalism (splitting the second paragraph so the player reaction is it's own thing would make up for this for flow), but even then there's SIGCOV provided by the sources and a clear WP:THREE he can draw on, that illustrates why it got the reaction it did beyond that of the game.

This is rather unfounded Zx.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:01, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

I accept I might be wrong about this, so what exactly are the three best sources being used here? In my view they appear to be almost entirely trivial coverage, even if articles. This one, for example, is a full article but only has the equivalent of one paragraph, where it jokes about the cow being a cannibal. But doesn't go much further than making a joke. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:32, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

The Famitsu article I feel is a good one, while the GamesRadar+ and Polygon sources are offering some discussion points. Keep in mind SIGCOV does not necessitate what the *length* of material taken from a source needs to be, as you've seen brought up more than once in AfDs, just an indication that there's something significant to cite. Beyond that, the PETA bit overall helps round the article out. There's also a New York Times article about the fan response. I do recall too there's a sister website to Paste magazine that also had an article, that I don't think is used in here. Cukie may recall that, that site had an article on FF6's cast too.

I'd definitely love for this to be stronger overall, but as it stands I think it's got some meat. The cannibalism paragraph and that bit explaining the fan art was in response to the lack of a switch 2 may be what's throwing you off perhaps? (the fan art from major figures I feel is fine to mention, I think the reason for it isn't helping as much and can be excluded)--Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:27, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

it's got some what now consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 16:16, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

EDIT: Found the Paste-related article, it's from Endless Mode.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:31, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Zx, I say this as nice as I possibly can, but I find your judgment on the notability (or lack thereof) deeply questionable if you didn't even check to verify whether the claim of Valner being overused was actually true. Why would you say that? Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:48, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Definitely noteworthy that it received coverage from the New York Times, that's far from routine VALNET churnalism. While I agree that the PETA content is conceptually silly, it still gets coverage, and what's in the article currently is far from promotional sounding in tone. Sergecross73 msg me 16:34, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Claiming that the PETA discussion shouldn't be in is also a bizarre claim for you to make here; you seem to be saying it's undue from your own personal feelings on the matter, when the only reason it's included is because multiple reliable sources discussed it to a degree warranting the coverage it received. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 17:21, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Note: I never claimed Valnet was overused a single time, so I don't know where that's coming from. I wasn't previously aware of those sources however, and I do believe that it squeaks by notability. (Which is precisely why I asked rather than doing anything drastic). I'm not going to try to go full crusader mode and claim that those sources aren't significant. I simply wanted to ask for clarification, which I got. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:23, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

To be fair, even if unintentional, the whole "the vast majority of sources are VALNET" comes across like you're implying that. I reckon you probably intended an 'either' in there?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:41, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Even if that wasn't your intent, by my count, the article has 16 sources I would consider non-trivial, non-VALNET, and non-primary, which is a majority of sources. I would argue that it has a smaller portion of weaker sources than, say, Dracthyr, which I also believe has no article that is comparable to the strongest article currently used in this one. Also, declaring that you intend to AfD an article before seeing it in its finished state should be well understood to be deeply unproductive, and you should take the fact that multiple experienced editors strongly disagree with you. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 23:07, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

As a separate point, I feel concerned that you didn't read WP:FRINGE thoroughly. It is about not granting fringe theories or controversial ideas equal weight to accepted theories and ideas. The nutshell specifically suggests that it's about scholarly matters, not criticism of a video game character. The page itself discusses exclusively science and nothing else. I believe it's inappropriate to use it in this way, as it seems like you're trying to make your argument seem stronger by implying that you have policies and guidelines to back up your position. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 23:14, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Dclemens1971 talk 02:40, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that a Mario Kart game may depict a Cow committing cannibalism?

• Source: After Animal Crossing: New Horizons, Mario Kart World is the latest Nintendo game to feature cannibalism because, yes, the cow happily chomps down beef burgers - GamesRadar, The sinister secret that Mario Kart World is hiding: where do those Dash Foods come from? - VG247

• • ALT1: ... that PETA wrote a letter to the CEO of Nintendo over a Cow? Source: "PETA Urges Nintendo to Remove 'Mario Kart World' Cow's Nose Ring: 'It's-a Mean!'" - Variety
  • ALT2: ... that a Cow influenced the development of Mario Kart World? Source: How A "Silly Sketch" Led To Cow Becoming "A Pivotal Character" In Mario Kart World - GameSpot
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Richard Raaphorst

Created by Captain Galaxy (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 6 past nominations.

CaptainGalaxy 07:13, 19 September 2025 (UTC).

• Reviewing now:

1. Each boldlinked article is new enough. Yes.
2. Each boldlinked article is long enough. Yes.
3. Each boldlinked article is well-sourced, neutral, BLP-compliant, and copyvio-free. Yes. Looks OK. Spotcheck came back fine.
4. Each boldlinked article is presentable. Yes; fine for DYK purposes.
5. The hook is cited to a reliable source. Yes. All sources are appropriate, and all sources verify the claims made in the hooks.
6. The hook is short enough. Yes.
7. The hook is interesting. Yes. The original hook and ALT are probably a bit better than ALT2, which is a bit vague.
8. Any images are freely licensed, clear at a diminished size, and used in the article. NA
9. Each QPQ has been done, where necessary. Yes.
10. There are no other, more subjective issues. No, not really.

Looks good to me. Nice hooks. Fun topic. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:31, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

I think that the PETA hook might be a little weak; to me, the way it is written, it seems somewhat mundane (PETA is known for being weird about animals in video games), and it might be a little too vague. Maybe mention its nose ring?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cukie Gherkin (talk • contribs)

@Cukie Gherkin: Like this?

• ALT1: ... that PETA wrote a letter to the CEO of Nintendo over a Cow's nose ring? CaptainGalaxy 21:07, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Trans claim

"In a video by PinkNews, they speculated that the Cow could be transgender due to the fact the cow had both male (horns) and female (udders and a nose ring) anatomy".

There are several issues here. First and foremost, it was not PinkNews, the video starts with "Gamers think", so PinkNews is reporting what other people say rather than speculating on it. Then the sentence asserts a fact the video also didn't mention, that the cow had male horns. No, the video says: "as well as horns, which are more commonly seen on bulls", because many cows do have horns (and even the video mentions this), so this sentence is attributing something not stated by the source and then claiming it as a fact. Then the nose ring: "for some commentators it was the serum piercing that has really sealed the deal for many" as "it adds a queer vibe". Cows can also be perfoed, it is not uncommon, and I dont' know how a nose ring falls within female anatomy. Basically, this sentence is misattributing stuff not said by the publication, that was said by random online non-experts on bovines. If it is to be kept, it should state the facts specifically said by the source instead. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 01:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cow (Mario)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Captain Galaxy (talk · contribs) 21:06, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: QuicoleJR (talk · contribs) 14:41, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I'll take this one. I've already looked over the article, and I have a few comments:

• The entire article frequently goes back and forth between “the Cow” and “a Cow” to refer to Cow. It should consistently use one unless there is a good reason not to.

I've tried to fix it the best I could. I felt the article should focus on the Cows as a species but I clarified the playable cow as "The Cow". Point out to me if their is any place where this may need continued rectifying. CaptainGalaxy 15:11, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

• When you introduce the idea of alternate costumes in the Gameplay section, you should probably mention that they come from Dash Food, to give context to the Reception section mentions.

 Done

• including a mission involving driving while dodging Cows and Cows being abducted. This wording makes it sound like they are the same.

 Done

• The character designer created a prototype, which they felt did not feel out of place as a racer and considered it cute. This sentence feels off. I think either the word it should be removed from the cuteness clause or added to the out-of-place clause.

 Done

• Shacknews’s veggie burger comments seem to be missing the associated source. That needs to be fixed.

 Done

Overall, this is a well-written article, we just need those few things fixed. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:41, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@QuicoleJR: Thank you for taking on the review, I have gone through what I could. Just let me know if you needed anything else done. CaptainGalaxy 15:11, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I looked through the article again, and I don't see any more concerns that would prevent promotion. The article passed the spot check as well. I will be closing this as successful. Great work! QuicoleJR (talk) 15:38, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Critical reception section seems too long

I think this is way too long for an article on an otherwise minor character in the Mario universe. A few paragraphs is fine, but this is excessive. Dingers5Days (talk) 17:38, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I mean, the amount of reception should reasonably be in accordance to how much people talked about the subject. The idea that the character is minor is not something reflected in sourcing; for instance, one paragraph discusses PETA's backlash, which was covered in multiple reliable sources. One paragraph was about the concept of cows eating burgers in the game, which also got covered significantly in sources. One paragraph exists to cover the phenomenon of how much fans loved Cow, to the point of creating fan art of it and overrunning player lobbies. And the first two paragraphs are of critics discussing the character's inclusion and what they thought. What do you think should be cut of that? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 04:55, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Then simply try to find a subject to create a subsection. I did the same for the Nier protagonist, Roxas and Riku when I found their reception too big Tintor2 (talk) 02:52, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

CITATION NEEDED!

peta?? Dm2727 (talk) 06:46, 9 May 2026 (UTC)