Talk:Cow dung

comments

I would suggest that the article on cowpie be merged with this one as cow dung and cowpie is simply a slang term for cow dung. --Cab88 16:56, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I did it. Sillybilly 06:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Not to be rude or anything, but the common person does not regularly look up cow pie 75.4.182.144 02:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Cow pie is the favourite food of Desperate Dan, from the Dandy. What are young children going to think if they are given the impression that their hero eats piles of cow shit? BennyFromCrossroads 23:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Cow Dung

This stuff is cool yet weird. Why do you think it is entirely gross. It is pretty funny. I would like to toss a cowpie at bush!

Why do you guys call it that, we call it cow patties!

Wikipedia is mean!

I wrote a perfectly good article called Cow plops, and they deleted it to go here!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Factdude (talk • contribs)

The articles clearly duplicate each other. If you have any new content to add, please add it here rather than creating a duplicate article. Hut 8.5 11:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

This page is vandalised quite, something should be done for the juvenile jokers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.55.129.212 (talk) 07:25, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

What the hell?

You have an entire page talking about, of all things, cow poop? 66.63.86.156 (talk) 20:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Come on people I know thats gross,but we actually use that stuff.lol imagine cows going on about our poop...we just gotta let the waste out!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.30.245.149 (talk) 13:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Antiseptic Properties

Perhaps this article should delve into the Indian traditional (religious?) thought that cow dung has antiseptic properties. I wonder if anybody has any access to good research on this. --69.151.147.118 (talk) 02:04, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Not research as such, but in this article (see 4th last bullet point at bottom of article), the BBC mentions it briefly as a fact, rather than merely a tradition. It surprised me enough that I came looking here. However, the article was written by a small regional team dealing with Eastern England (citing info from the "Hara [sic] Krishna" movement), rather than written by either their specialist India or medical teams, so perhaps deserves to be given less weight than most BBC statements on medical issues. Enginear (talk) 03:18, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

We really can't use this in the article per WP:MEDRS without a better source - a religious movement is essentially worthless as a source for medical information. Hut 8.5 07:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

NPK?

I ended up here because I wanted to know the NPK of cow manure. After coming here I still don't know it. So what is the NPK of cow manure? I think an article about cow manure should list NPK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.174.215.84 (talk) 08:12, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Insect Repellent Properties

The claims that cow dung as an insect repellent should be supported with some evidence. If anyone could find some, please let me know. I just don't want this article to be biased, since many Indian people in particular seem to assert claims like this.Skepticalnotcynical (talk) 13:14, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cow dung. 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/20070706132354/http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/yourhome/technical/fs34d.htm to http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/yourhome/technical/fs34d.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101228165853/http://www.beaveroklahoma.net/CowChip.html to http://www.beaveroklahoma.net/CowChip.html

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 23:09, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Removal of unsourced Lakshmi–cow dung claim

The previous revision of this article included an unsourced and incorrect claim that the goddess Lakshmi resides in cow dung, attributed to the Mahabharata. This claim is not found in any reliable edition of the Mahabharata or in mainstream academic scholarship. It appears to be a fake story written to hurt religious sentiments and does not meet Wikipedia's policies on verifiability (WP:V), reliable sourcing (WP:RS), or undue weight (WP:UNDUE).

The content was removed for these reasons. Please do not re-add this claim unless it is supported by high-quality, scholarly, reliable sources. Abhilashns (talk) 09:45, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Oxford University Press is not WP:RS? That's quite a statement. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 09:17, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate the clarification, Joshua. I acknowledge that Oxford University Press is a reliable source. However, my concern here is WP:WEIGHT and WP:NPOV.

This specific story is frequently lifted out of context on social media and YouTube to mock the deity. While Leslie (1989) discusses it, she does so within the specific context of the 18th-century Stridharmapaddhati to explain ritual purity. To ensure the article remains neutral and encyclopedic, I propose we:

1. Contextualize the source: Explicitly state that this narrative is from the Stridharmapaddhati tradition or Tryambakayajvan’s 18th-century commentary. Attributing it broadly to "The Mahabharata" is misleading as it implies a universal, ancient core belief rather than a specific regional or late-medieval interpretation.
2. Address Canonicity: Note its absence from the Critical Edition (BORI) of the Mahabharata. In line with modern scholarship, we should distinguish between the "Vulgate" recensions and the Critical Edition to provide the reader with accurate historical depth.
3. Theological Intent: Ensure the context of ritual purity (Shuddhi) is included. The source material uses this story to illustrate the supreme sanctity of the cow (where even its waste is considered a purifying agent), rather than as a disparagement of the goddess. Without this context, the inclusion feels like a "trivia" point that violates neutral point of view.

~2026-74649-4 (talk) 09:53, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Is this a ChatGPT-generated response? BORI's critical edition of the Mahabharata mentions this as "श्रीगोसंवाद:" (13.81). Specifically, 13-81-023 and 13-81-024. utcursch | talk 19:27, 10 April 2026 (UTC)