Talk:Rawhide (material)

My sister's toddler (11 months) is using a dog's chewing toy made from rawhide as a teething toy. He loves it!!! Any objections?

blues brother sing "rowhide" in the film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.67.21.122 (talk) 02:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

The minerals in the chew toy is for a dog...how will it afect a HUMAN?! AMWS (talk) 17:52, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Textile?

Please see Talk:Textile#Rawhide_.28textile.29.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 22:29, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Rawhide is not a textile. I believe the article on the animal skin material should be titled simply "Rawhide" and the disambiguation page titled "Rawhide (disambiguation)". Just now Rawhide (disambiguation) redirects to a disambiguation page at Rawhide.__ Just plain Bill (talk) 23:55, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree with this suggestion.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd support a move to rawhide (material) or similar. However there are multiple articles with the title Rawhide and this unreferenced stub is not clearly the most important or the most popular (per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC). Both the song and the TV series get more page views. Tassedethe (talk) 00:09, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

That would work, I suppose. Since the material is the basis for the names of all those other topics, common sense would indicate that it be the primary article, with a dab hatnote. Unreferenced stubhood is a temporary condition... __ Just plain Bill (talk) 00:20, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Just plain Bill, the root meaning of a word should normally take the primary title. Except in cases where the root meaning has become archaic or entirely forgotten. This is where users will expect to be taken and hence would comply with WP:LEAST. SpinningSpark 17:57, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

fire

Does rawhide survive in a fire? Googling didn't produce any results. 108.51.169.236 (talk) 17:10, 17 December 2022 (UTC)