Talk:Buffalo

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Mammals

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles

Bison

American Buffalo are not buffalo. They're Bison. Their name is a misnoma, and as such shouldn't be included in this list.

Do you mean "misnomer"? It is true that they are in fact bison, however, since they are commonly called buffalo, this disambiguation page would at least direct a reader to the correct article. Wolfdog 07:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BuffaloFish

My Webster's dictionary defines a buffalofish as military slang for a heavily armored amphibious vehicle. Could someone add a page bout this to link to? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.65.85.101 (talk) 20:40, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Buffalo armored vehicle

Can someone please make a link and/or article about the Buffalo mine disposal vehicle? Here are some references

http://www.forceprotection.net/models/buffalo/ (manufacturer's website)

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/001801.html

http://ccsweb.pica.army.mil/articles/buffalo_abu_ghraib.htm

Weasel words

The phrase "Buffalo, New York - the best known Buffalo in the USA" do contain weasel words. I opt that it should be removed, or perhaps changed to "a well known Buffalo". Please note that the phrase has been removed by two different users. The article about weasel words has an example showing that this is in fact weasel words.
Dubidub 13:21, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Google for the word Buffalo. Every hit on the front page is for the city of Buffalo, NY. Therefore, it is the most well known Buffalo. That is not an opinion, it is a fact. Please show an example of another Buffalo that can be considered equally well known before changing the phrase again. QVanillaQ 21:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

plural

Buffalos or Buffaloes? I see both in common use. Drutt (talk) 17:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The plural is Buffalo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.183.129 (talk) 21:27, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One buffalo, two buffalo, three buffalos, four buffaloes? This is confusing. Drutt (talk) 10:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Buffalo buffalo etc sentence

Yea, I think someone made a sentence that was just seven Buffalo's back to back that ended up being a grammatically correct sentence. 128.205.228.150 (talk) 05:21, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's already listed – linked from the "see also" section: Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo. It only works in US English – to British ears it's meaningless, as "buffalo" is not a verb to us. Richard New Forest (talk) 23:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm an American and I've never heard of the verb "to buffalo" before either. I think it's a pretty obscure verb in any version of English. Rreagan007 (talk) 00:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clean-up

This has been tagged since early Dec and there have been many edits, but they have mainly been people reverting each other - it hasn't changed much. What do people think still needs to be done? Boleyn3 (talk) 11:37, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It currently looks ok to me.--Commander Keane (talk) 05:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then you obviously haven't read the MOS:DAB. This article HAS to be a list of articles for subjects that are referred to by the single word "Buffalo". DABs are not lists of things from Buffalo or things that have Buffalo in their name. I mean - really. Please check out the DAB project if you don't believe me WP:WPDAB --Hutcher (talk) 20:08, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about the Belgians who immigrated to the United States and traveled from New York City to or through Buffalo, New York? They are referred to and known as Buffaloes. It is unfortunate that this small piece of history will be lost in the internet world because there are not online documentations of it. My great grandfather is a Buffalo and those of his generation are referred to as Buffaloes in the Belgian community in Detroit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.148.76.186 (talk) 05:05, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added common redirect for lead

Please do no revert the edit I put in for quick disambiguation between bison and the city of Buffalo. These are the two common uses for both terms. --Dekema2 (talk) 17:16, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This new format goes against the manual of style for disambiguation pages. Giving one example of a page that has made another decision doesn't make it the new standard. -- Fyrael (talk) 06:54, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where in the manual of style does it say otherwise? And what argument was made on the San Jose page to have common terms listed in the lead? I'd just like to know, I don't know the entire manual. --Dekema2 (talk) 18:42, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I took out the "largest city" for Buffalo NY. Buffalo ZA is bigger Alanf777 (talk) 20:03, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move, and redirect to Buffalo, New York - 24 September 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Nominator agreed to withdraw proposal. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 16:34, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Buffalo → Buffalo (disambiguation) – This RM is being held on the precedent of the St. Louis move in 2012, which was already a redirect to the city and not the king. The argument presented evidence for the move based upon page counts, and I have the page counts for Bison, Buffalo, and Buffalo, New York. When examining these page counts, it is clear that Buffalo, New York has a much higher page count than any of these articles (including the dab) and would only benefit from this article becoming Buffalo (disambiguation) with the current title redirecting to the city, but not as a renamed article.

Furthermore, as a result of these page counts, we can conclude that Buffalo, New York would be the primary topic. I am also aware of the guidelines in WP:USPLACE that would disqualify the article for a city-name only title. Buffaboy ^talk 00:03, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, the links you've provided show traffic over the last 90 days for Buffalo, New York, but only for the month of September for the other two. When actually comparing the last 90 days, New York only has a small edge on the other topics. Here are some approximate totals of note:

Buffalo, New York: 105,000
Buffalo Bills: 98,000
American Bison: 83,000
Bison: 62,000
Buffalo: 47,000
African Buffalo: 44,000

So, while deciding how much page views are necessary for a primary topic is never an exact science, I certainly wouldn't say that Buffalo, New York has a "much higher page count" than some of the others. -- Fyrael (talk) 02:26, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, page view stats aren't enough to show a clear primary topic and my Google search was primarily filled with animals. Therefore, Buffalo needs to be a disambiguation. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:45, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Comparing "Saint Louis/St. Louis" to "Buffalo" is an Wikipedia:Other stuff exists argument, as other factors are put into play. As basically stated by the original poster on Talk:St. Louis#Requested move, the St. Louis page was previously a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT since 2004 (in other words, there was already silent consensus that the city was the primary topic of the term "St. Louis"), and the request was to essentially move the page across this redirect (since that was within that so-called "AP Stylebook" exception of WP:USPLACE). Another comment on that discussion noted that there was enough distinction between "Saint Louis" and "St. Louis" (even when I compare Google results to "Saint Louis" and "St. Louis", I get somewhat different results, with the latter term getting more results on the city, and not many referring to the king). That is not the case with "Buffalo". And as Tavix stated, a Google search yields a mixture of both the city and the animals. Combined with the fact that traffic for the city article over a 90-day period really only has a small edge on the other topics, that is not enough to warrant a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, IMO. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:26, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose per the usage statistics presented, the New York location is not a primary topic. Indeed, it isn't even close to being a primary topic. The city has nowhere near the total of all the other topics, and not even close to 10x more than the next competing topic nor 3x more than all the other topics. -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 07:39, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Absolutely no way is Buffalo, New York the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for Buffalo as it doesn't satisy either of the criteria. It is neither much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term nor does it have substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term. Zarcadia (talk) 12:46, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per the greater historical significance of each of the three major animals represented by this name. I also note that Water Buffalo, not listed above, has 62,239 pageviews in the last 90 days, for over 164,000 pageviews for the top three kinds of animal. bd2412 T 13:48, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I withdraw this proposal. It seems San Jose is very similar to this. Buffaboy ^talk 20:28, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How is San Jose similar to this? Please explain. Zarcadia (talk) 20:57, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's a San Jose, Costa Rica as pointed out here: Talk:San_José#Requested_move Buffaboy ^talk 21:01, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But what's the relevance to this RM? Zarcadia (talk) 21:11, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This line here is similar to the difference between Buffalo and Bison:

Oppose. San Jose and San José should lead to the same place as it's clear that there is no clear and consistent distinction made between them by English speakers. The only settlement that has a claim to primary topic status is the Californian one, so it or the dab page needs to be at this title. Thryduulf (talk) 18:09, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

In this case, Buffalo (city) and Buffalo (bison) can mean the same exact thing, with the only distinguishers being New York and the fact that the Buffalo is an animal. Buffaboy ^talk 22:33, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, the long-term significance of the city does not exceed that of the animal. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:28, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

To buffalo

Coversational to fool 2601:180:C101:DFA0:C1BE:4CC:40C5:ABAA (talk) 21:09, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]