Talk:Veganism: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 12:25, 7 January 2016 editZippy268 (talk \| contribs)62 edits →A good quality independent authoritative source ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 12:53, 26 December 2024 edit undoYbsone (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers18,370 edits →lack of criticism page: ReplyTag: Reply
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{FAQ}}
	{{WikiProjectBannerShell\|collapsed=yes\|1=
			{{Not a forum}}
	{{WikiProject Animal rights\|class=B\|importance=Top}}
			{{British English Oxford spelling}}
	{{WikiProject Food and drink\|class=B\|importance=high\| b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = yes
			{{Article history
	\| b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy --> = yes
	\| b3 <!--Structure --> = yes
	\| b4 <!--Grammar & style --> = yes
	\| b5 <!--Supporting materials --> = yes
	\| b6 <!--Accessibility --> = yes}}
	{{WikiProject Medicine\|class=B\|importance=Mid}}
	}}
	{{Vital article\|level=4\|topic=Life\|class=B}}
	{{ArticleHistory
	\|action1 = GAN		\|action1 = GAN
	\|action1date = 2007-07-18, 16:53:38		\|action1date = 2007-07-18, 16:53:38
Line 28:		Line 20:
	\|action3result = not listed		\|action3result = not listed
	\|action3oldid = 533970543		\|action3oldid = 533970543

			\|currentstatus=DGA
			}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|collapsed=yes\|class=B\|vital=yes\|1=
			{{WikiProject Alternative Views\|importance=Mid}}
			{{WikiProject Animal rights\|importance=Top}}
			{{WikiProject Food and drink\|importance=high}}
			{{WikiProject Effective Altruism\|importance=Mid}}
			{{WikiProject Medicine\|importance=Mid}}
			{{WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism\|importance=Top}}
			{{WikiProject Nonviolence}}
			{{WikiProject Philosophy\|importance=Low\|ethics=yes\|contemporary=yes}}
	}}		}}
	{{Press		{{Press
	\| author = Mona Chalabi		\| author = Mona Chalabi
	\| date = 2014~~-01-14~~		\| date = 9 January 2014
	\| url = http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/jan/09/meat-atlas-latin-america-soybean-empire-food		\| url = http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/jan/09/meat-atlas-latin-america-soybean-empire-food
	\| title = Meat atlas shows Latin America has become a soybean empire		\| title = Meat atlas shows Latin America has become a soybean empire
	\| org = '']''		\| org = '']''
	}}		}}

	{{FAQ}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config		{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\|archiveheader = {{aan}}		\|archiveheader = {{aan}}
	\|maxarchivesize = 150K		\|maxarchivesize = 150K
	\|counter = 11		\|counter = 20
	\|minthreadsleft = 0
	\|minthreadstoarchive = 1		\|minthreadstoarchive = 1
	\|algo = old(~~30d~~)		\|algo = old(90d)
	\|archive = Talk:Veganism/Archive %(counter)d		\|archive = Talk:Veganism/Archive %(counter)d
	}}		}}
	{{archives \|auto=yes\|search=yes \|bot=MiszaBot I\|age=21 \|units=days \|index=/Archive index\|
	<center>'''Archives by topic:'''<br />
	]</center>}}
	{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn		{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
	\|target=/Archive index \|mask=/Archive <#> \|leading_zeros=0 \|indexhere=yes		\|target=/Archive index \|mask=/Archive <#> \|leading_zeros=0 \|indexhere=yes
	}}		}}
			{{annual readership}}
	{{Misplaced Pages:Featured article tools\|1=Veganism}}
			{{archives \|auto=yes\|search=yes \|bot=MiszaBot I\|age=30 \|units=days \|index=/Archive index\|

			<center>'''Archives by topic:'''<br />
	__TOC__
			]</center>}}

	== Schnitzels ==
	]
	]]]
	]

	Ben, please don't keep adding those images to the page, particularly the schnitzels. If you don't like the ones we have, there are lots of good vegan food images on Commons and even better ones on Flickr. Most people will release them if asked. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 05:23, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
	:Hello,

	:1. What are "these images"? What images do you mean?

	:2. What's wrong with the Schnitzels image?

	:I've tried to add only 3 images: the current Schnitzels image, the one of Bixa orellana as a Vegan cosmetics material (which you have deleted for a reason unclear to me), and another one (I think, I can't recall now what it was). You where the only one who objected for all of them, though ] objected to another one about a Vegan demonstration in Tel Aviv, Israel in the kinda rational claim that it doesn't seem enough related to Veganism. ] (]) 17:39, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

	::Ben, there were more than three (see , for example, where you added 12). It's partly the number of images, partly the type, partly that you keep adding them over objections. The schnitzel image is a picture of something (not entirely clear what) in a plastic box. The demo image was one of people holding signs in Hebrew. There was the blue plastic pillow filling, the rice and beans made of dairy yoghurt, and the Indian meal that, according to the source (not the image page) was vegetarian, not vegan.

	::There are a lot of free vegan images on Commons and Flickr taken by professional vegan caterers, so if you want to replace any of the food images, we can find a new one from those collections. They list the ingredients, so we can be reasonably sure they're vegan, and the images are often professional looking. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 20:00, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
	::::* Adding one image at a time shouldn't be considered problematic by means of "number of images".
	::::* I see nothing wrong with the type of the image of the Schnitzels or the Bixa Orellana. It's a matter of the majority's consent and I hope there will be a majority to support them from now on.
	::::* You where mainly the only one who objected the images. Sadly there aren't many other opinions in the talk page.
	::::I have many free images at hand (some are indeed from Flickr) and not only of food. When I'll find the time I'll search and upload. ] (]) 00:13, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
	Ben, thinking about it some more, there's no reason you shouldn't create ], if you want to make that your focus. I've noticed you adding quite a bit of material about prevalance there, food, etc. It would be good to have individual article countries if the sources exist. We could link to them at the top of the demographics section. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 21:28, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
	:Nice idea. ] (]) 00:13, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

	== Recent changes - text restored ==

	Viriditas, rather than making threats, perhaps you could tell us why you think your version of the article is better so that we can discuss improvement in a ] manner. I have copied this discussion to the article talk page where discussion of improvements should take place. ] (]) 10:22, 4 January 2016 (UTC) .

	:I have just noticed that the text that I supported was that used in the version that was . ] (]) perhaps you could tell us why you think your version of the article is better so that we can discuss improvement in a ] manner. ] (]) 10:22, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

	::Your argument consists of pointing me to a version from ''nine'' years ago. Please remind me: why is this older version an improvement? ] (]) 11:00, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

	:::It was then listed as a Good Article and has since been delisted.

	:::The current description seems to be extracted and synthesised from a number of sources. The former description was from an obviously independent (of editiors' opinions here) and authoritative source. Why do you prefer the current description? ] (])

	::::{{ping\|Martin Hogbin}} Based on ] you are aware of the consensus on this issue and understand the problem with this revision. Based on ] you have concerns about promoting the Vegan Society. It is impossible for me to believe that you cannot see what is wrong with the revision to the lede, which gives disproportionate ] to the Vegan Society's view. In the context of your behavior on ] topics generally, it's becoming very hard to assume good faith, as several editors have pointed out. --] (]) 15:57, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
	:::::I have looked at the section you link to and all I can see is the opinions of various editors, including me. I cannot see what is wrong with using a quote from the vegan society compared with what seems to me just the opinion of editors here. Although the current text does have references it seems to have been put together from snippets specially chosen by editors here to promote their personal opinions. Ideally we need a single descrption from an independent, neutral, quality secondary source on the subject.

	:::::Regarding what you call my 'behavior on ] topics generally', this consists mainly of disagreeing with editors who are promoting a green political agenda. WP should be neutral. However individuals may feel about green issues WP is not the place to promote green politics.

	:::::When you say you find it hard to assume good faith on my part what exactly do you mean. Do you think some person or corporation is controlling me? Do you think that I have some agenda other than maintaining a neutral, mainstream, view on WP? ] (]) 16:50, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

	:::::::], I do not know whether someone is controlling you. It's a very weird thing for you to bring up, given that I've never made any such suggestion, and it seems like a ]. I do think that any intelligent person who looks at your edit history here, on the gulf oil spill, or on other environmental issues, will conclude that you are ] when it comes to these topics, and will see through your attempts to paint editors who express this concern as bullies. --] (]) 23:10, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
	::::::::Your mention of ] is very appropriate. I am here to build an ''encyclopdia''; I am not here to write articles that will change opinions, promote views, make judgements on companies, or to champion the environment, animal rights, left wing politics, right wing politics, or anything else, however worthy you may think the cause may be, because that is not the purpose of an ''encyclopdia''. Please have a read of a good quality written encyclopdia to remind youself of the language, style, and content that is appropriate for an encyclopedia.
	::::::::My complaint is not that you disagree with me, we have to accept that our opinions on some subjects differ and that they are likely to remain that way, neither is it that you express your opinion here, or that you challenge mine. My complaint is that you prosecute your argument by making personal attacks and accusations against me, for example criticising my 'behaviour' in a completely different article, suggesting that I am not editing in good faith.
	::::::::I can assure you that I am here to create an ''encyclopdia'' which should contain all the world's ''knowledge''. It is not intended to be a mouthpiece for personal opinions and philosophies, however sincerely held..
	::::::::I am happy to carry on discussing the content of this article with you in a civil manner if you wish, as I am doing with two other editors below, but please leave the personal accusations out. ] (]) 09:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
	::::::I agree that the quote is UNDUE; the Vegan Society is only one of ], and I think it makes sense to refer to scholarly rather than propagandistic definitions when possible. ] (]) 17:22, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

	:::::::It is a fair point that a quote from the Vegan Society might be considered propagandistic (is there such a word?). ] (]) 17:33, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
	:::::::Although, when I look at it, “a way of living that seeks to exclude, as far as possible and practicable, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing and any other purpose.” it seems a clear and neutral description. I would not criticise it as being too promotional. I have also noticed that this definition is quoted in one of the references cited in the lead.

	:::::::What exactly is your objection to this wording? ] (]) 18:22, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

	{{od}} Part of the Vegan Society's definition is already in the lead, in the third paragraph where we allude to the history. Because they created the term, it's appropriate to mention there how they moved from diet in 1944 to any animal use in 1951. It's not appropriate to prioritize their current definition, especially not in the first sentence, because now there are competing views. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 21:41, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
	:I fail to how ] applies here. Although I see a long discussion about the idiosycratic way that 'commodity' is used in the lead, I see no discussion of the various different views of what 'veganism' means. If we are to give due weight, I would expect to see a discussion along the lines of 'X says 'veganism is ...', 'Y says veganism is ...' etc. All I see is a editor-based ] of words and snippets from a collection of sources; essentially ].

	I why I reverted Martin Hogbin; the Vegan Society quote is WP:Undue weight for the ]. And there's also the fact that there are different types of vegans, as noted in the second paragraph of the lead. ] (]) 22:26, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

	==Particularly in Diet==

	I would like to see a source for the specification that veganism is abstinence from using animal products "particularly in diet". The cite on that sentence does not specify that. ] (]) 05:34, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
	:Searches for veganism on Google scholar bring up a lot of papers that treat veganism specifically as a diet. The following papers which treat it as an ideology also support the qualifier "particularly in diet":. --] (]) 05:48, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
	:: A lot of people who write scholarly papers on veganism, aren't even vegan themselves. I would like to know what page of the material you cited specifies the definition as "particularly diet" and why you think these authors have authority over the definition of veganism to begin with. I can provide numerous sources that specify that it is not particular to diet and that diet is only one part of a much bigger picture. ] (]) 06:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
	:::It sounds like you haven't read the article you are edit warring on. Why in the world would someone have to be a vegan to write a paper about it? That's a fallacious argument. Do you deny the distinction between dietary, ethical, and environmental veganism? The authors have authority over the definition because that's how we write encyclopedia articles—based solely on reliable sources. You say you've been editing Misplaced Pages for a decade but it sounds like you've been editing for ten minutes. ] (]) 06:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
	:::: Please refrain from making personal attacks. You are in violation ] as well as ] again...in addition to spewing insults at me on my talk page, which is also a violation of both of the above. ] (]) 06:46, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
	:::::::As it happens, I do not agree with Zippy on article content but I do agree with ]. Please let us stick to discussing content. ] (]) 10:16, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
	:::These are two highly cited papers on veganism as a cultural movement. Actually look at them and you will see the statement supported right in the beginning of each. For example, in the 2nd one by Cherry, the third sentence after the abstract is "The vegan movement is a good example: vegans are strict vegetarians who, in addition to not eating meat, fish, or fowl, also do not consume any animal products such as dairy and eggs. Since veganism focuses on eliminating animal products from people’s diets and lifestyles, veganism is often considered as only one goal or tactic of the animal rights movement (Munro, 2005)." --] (]) 06:13, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
	:::: Your idea that they are highly cited sources is your personal opinion. Your quote also does not specify that it is particular in diet. The proper authority for the definition of the term veganism is the Vegan Society as they are the ones who coined the term to begin with. They specifically do not specify that it is particular to diet because it was and is not intended to be particularly in diet. Please see below for the correct description and definition.

			== "particularly in diet" ==
	:::::''"Although the vegan diet was defined early on it was as late as 1949 before Leslie J Cross pointed out that the society lacked a definition of veganism and he suggested “he principle of the emancipation of animals from exploitation by man”. This is later clarified as “to seek an end to the use of animals by man for food, commodities, work, hunting, vivisection, and by all other uses involving exploitation of animal life by man”.''

			I know this has been discussed a hundred times but... this isn't a dictionary, this is an encyclopedia. It's ok for a dictionary to reflect how people misuse words, but an encyclopedia should reflect what the word ''actually'' means. As I dig deeper all I can see is that The Vegan Society never defined veganism as a diet. They always defined it as a philosophy. ] (]) 17:03, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
	:::::''"When the society became a registered charity in 1979, the Memorandum and Articles of Association updated this definition of “veganism”" as:
			:It wasn't originally defined as a philosophy, vegan back then just meant "non-dairy vegetarian". Watson's first definition of veganism in 1945 was very simple, "''the practice of living on fruits, nuts, vegetables, grains, and other wholesome non-animal products''". Veganism as a philosophy was first defined by Leslie Cross in 1951. It's both a diet and a philosophy. Over time it was turned into a philosophy. Most vegans today consider it a philosophy. Nothing wrong with that they can call it what they want, but we can't deny diet has been an important factor. ] (]) 19:18, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
			:You are correct, wikipedia is misrepresenting veganism, by suggesting that it is mainly dietary. The usage of "particularly in diet" is completely incorrect.
			:The correct definition is: "Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals" ~ The Vegan Society
			:The wikipedia definition has been incorrect for many years, and they do not appear to allow the page to be corrected. This would have been pointed out to wikipedia many times. After many years of donations, they will not be receiving any more of my money. ] (]) 02:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

			::Your definition of veganism is incorrect, and misleading, it has been this way for years, and there is no doubt this has been pointed out to you many times, yet it remains incorrect. Why is this? Veganism is not a diet.
	:::::''" a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals."''

			The term veganism was coined by The Vegan Society, their definition is not up for dispute
	::::There is no reason why diet should be singled out in the lead statement when veganism is not particular to diet to begin with. In fact, it's a misleading statement. Diet is no more important than any other aspect of veganism according to the people who invented the word to begin with. Veganism is not particularly in diet anymore than it is particularly in clothing or particularly in toiletries, or any other use of animal products. ] (]) 06:46, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
	::::::On the contrary, there are many good reasons. See the thread directly above this one. I assume it's just a coincidence that you, Tha1uw4nt, and Martin Hogbin are all edit warring just within the last 24 hours over the Vegan Society definition? To me it appears to be a coordinated effort to disrupt this article. ] (]) 06:57, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
	:::::::That is correct. It is a coincidence that these other people are discussing this. However, at the same time, no it's not a coincidence because the definition of veganism is not particular to diet. No, those are not good reasons above. And the idea that a disagreement between authors constitutes a "disruption", is nonsensical. The idea that this constitutes "edit warring" is also nonsensical. ] (]) 07:09, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

			"Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals." ] (]) 02:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
	The lead of this article is biased towards diet. ] (]) 07:46, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
			::The Vegan Society definition of veganism changed many times in the past. Their original definition of veganism in 1945 was "''the practice of living on fruits, nuts, vegetables, grains, and other wholesome non-animal products''" . The claims about veganism being a philosophy came years later.
			::The line on the article "''Veganism is the practice of abstaining from the use of animal products—particularly in diet—and an associated philosophy that rejects the commodity status of animals''", is accurate per the sourcing. ] (]) 11:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
			:::Ok, here is my suggestion for a lead sentence that reflects this without downplaying the other aspects of the lifestyle: "Veganism is the practice of abstaining from the use of ] and the consumption of ] — and an associated philosophy that rejects the commodity status of animals." If a reliable source is needed, I would suggest this one: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11016330/
			::::What do you think? --] (]) 22:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
			:::::] has a poor academic reception and has been accused of predatory publishing. I doubt many would agree the source qualifies as a good ]. ] (]) 22:30, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
			::::::Ok, here's another source: https://www.academia.edu/3641785/Resisting_the_Globalization_of_Speciesism_Vegan_Abolitionism_as_a_Site_of_Consumer_Based_Social_Change
			::::::Is this a reliable source?
			::::::] (]) 18:47, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::::::Looks good to me.] (]) 03:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

			:::FYI the modern vegan society definition is already cited on the article in the "definition" section ] (]) 12:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
	=====A good quality independent authoritative source=====
			::::FYI the contemporary definition of veganism, which has not changed in many years, is the definition that this article should commence with. Anything else is a deliberate misrepresentation of the truth. Veganism is not a diet, vegetarianism is, they are two completely different things. ] (]) 12:07, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
	Might I suggest that this dispute could be resolved by finding some authoritative independent (neither pro nor anti veganisn) sources which define the meaning of the word. At present we have a description based mainly on the opinions of editors here and supported by a ] of exerpts from selected sources. ] (]) 10:16, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
			::::Your profile on wikipedia clearly states your bias, as a vegetarian you should remove yourself from any, and all interactions with vegan pages. Misplaced Pages should be treating them as completely different subjects, since they are.
			::::Your claim of "objectivity" is a mockery to the premise of Misplaced Pages. Your sole interest is to pretend that vegetarianism is ethical, deliberately contriving similarities with veganism, and grouping the two together at every opportunity. It is a wonder you do not boast about blocking the correction of this page on your profile, there is still some room for more boasting... ] (]) 12:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
			:::::Your account is likely to be blocked if you continue with that because you are far too aggressive and are making personal attacks. It's not worth responding to your false allegations and misinformation. I founded ]. We already have a definition section of veganism on the article and a lead that is well sourced. ] if you want your suggestions to be added to the article, but doubtful because we have already had this discussion many times before. Check the archives. ] (]) 12:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
			::::::Begenuine8 has been indef blocked for making personal attacks. If any other users want to continue this discussion make sure to suggest good ]. As noted already in the "Definition" section of the article, we do cite the Vegan Society's modern definition of veganism. ] (]) 15:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

			== lack of criticism page ==
	Please remember the meaning we give in this article should not be the meaning that editors here think it ought to be (even if they have done extensive private research on the subject) but the generally inderstood meaning of the term.

			If Veganism is to be seen as a philosophy then they’re must be a page dedicated to criticism. This isn’t due to the philosophy being “wrong” however the page currently presents this particular idea as being unfalsifiable thus unable to be disputed. ] (]) 12:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
	My dictionary (Collins 1994) says for 'Vegan', 'A person who refrains from using any animal product whatever for food, clothing, or any purpose'. ] (]) 10:22, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

	:I ~~concur~~ ~~with~~ ~~all~~ of of the ~~above~~. ] (]) 12:25, 7 ~~January~~ ~~2016~~ (UTC)		:"Must be" only if there are sufficient reliable sources on the matter. Provide them. ] (]) 12:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 12:53, 26 December 2024

view · edit Frequently asked questions

To view an answer, click the link to the right of the question.

Q1: Why does the article distinguish between dietary and ethical vegans? Aren't ethical vegans the only true vegans? The article makes the distinction because reliable sources make it. See Talk:Veganism/Sources for the dietary veganism distinction for a selection of sources. For example:

Brenda Davis, Vesanto Melina (2013):
"There are degrees of veganism. A pure vegetarian or dietary vegan is someone who consumes a vegan diet but doesn't lead a vegan lifestyle. Pure vegetarians may use animal products, support the use of animals in research, wear leather clothing, or have no objection to the exploitation of animals for entertainment. They are mostly motivated by personal health concerns rather than by ethical objections. Some may adopt a more vegan lifestyle as they are exposed to vegan philosophy."
A. Breeze Harper (2011):
"Practitioners of veganism abstain from animal consumption (dietary and non-dietary). However, the culture of veganism iself is not a monolith and is composed of many different subcultures and philosophies throughout the world, ranging from punk strict vegans for animals rights, to people who are dietary vegans for personal health reasons, to people who practice veganism for religious and spiritual reasons."
Associated Press (2011):
"Ethical vegans have a moral aversion to harming animals for human consumption ... though the term often is used to describe people who follow the diet, not the larger philosophy"
Gary Francione (2010):
"Although veganism may represent a matter of diet or lifestyle for some, ethical veganism is a profound moral and political commitment ..."
Robert Garner (2010):
"I have been a vegetarian all my adult life, and I am currently a dietary vegan, and I do not wear leather."
Layli Phillips (2010):
"While some vegans, for instance members of the Straight Edge community, demand unswerving commitment to vegan ideals and practices, many people practice some form of partial veganism. For instance, many vegans refrain from eating meat, dairy, and eggs, yet eat honey or wear leather. Other vegans shop vegan and eat vegan at home, but look the other way at a vegetarian restaurant for dishes that use a small amount of butter, cream, or cheese. ... You get the idea: for many people, veganism is a principle, not a law."
International Vegetarian Union (2000):
"Dietary Vegan: follows a vegan diet, but doesn't necessarily try and exclude non-food uses of animals."

References

Brenda Davis, Vesanto Melina, Becoming Vegan: Express Edition, Summertown: Book Publishing Company, 2013, 3.
A. Harper Breeze, "Going Beyond the Normative White 'Post-racial' Vegan Epistemology", in Psyche Williams Forson and Carole Counihan (eds.), Taking Food Public: Redefining Foodways in a Changing World, New York: Routledge, 2011, 158.
"Vegan Diets Become More Popular, More Mainstream". CBS News. Associated Press. 5 January 2011. Archived from the original on 1 March 2018. Retrieved 1 March 2018. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |dead-url= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
Gary L. Francione, "The Abolition of Animal Exploitation" in Gary L. Francione and Robert Garner, The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition Or Regulation?, Columbia University Press, 2010, 62.
"A Discussion between Francione and Gardner", in Francione and Garner 2010, 257.
Layli Phillips, "Veganism and Ecowomanism", in A. Breeze Harper (ed.), Sistah Vegan: Black Female Vegans Speak on Food, Identity, Health, and Society, Brooklyn: Lantern Books, 2010, 11.
"Definitions", International Vegetarian Union, archived 29 September 2000.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Veganism. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Veganism at the Reference desk.

This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Veganism was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 18, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
October 14, 2007	Good article reassessment	Delisted
January 20, 2013	Good article nominee	Not listed

Current status: Delisted good article

This

level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Alternative views Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Animal rights Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of animal rights on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Animal rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Animal rightsTemplate:WikiProject Animal rightsAnimal rights
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and drink High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Misplaced Pages requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Effective Altruism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Effective Altruism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relevant to effective altruism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Effective AltruismWikipedia:WikiProject Effective AltruismTemplate:WikiProject Effective AltruismEffective Altruism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Veganism and Vegetarianism Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nonviolence (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nonviolence, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.NonviolenceWikipedia:WikiProject NonviolenceTemplate:WikiProject NonviolenceNonviolence

Philosophy: Ethics / Contemporary Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics
	Contemporary philosophy

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Mona Chalabi (9 January 2014). "Meat atlas shows Latin America has become a soybean empire". The Guardian.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20

Archives by topic:
Sources for ethical/dietary distinction

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

"particularly in diet"

I know this has been discussed a hundred times but... this isn't a dictionary, this is an encyclopedia. It's ok for a dictionary to reflect how people misuse words, but an encyclopedia should reflect what the word actually means. As I dig deeper all I can see is that The Vegan Society never defined veganism as a diet. They always defined it as a philosophy. Countryboy603 (talk) 17:03, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

It wasn't originally defined as a philosophy, vegan back then just meant "non-dairy vegetarian". Watson's first definition of veganism in 1945 was very simple, "the practice of living on fruits, nuts, vegetables, grains, and other wholesome non-animal products". Veganism as a philosophy was first defined by Leslie Cross in 1951. It's both a diet and a philosophy. Over time it was turned into a philosophy. Most vegans today consider it a philosophy. Nothing wrong with that they can call it what they want, but we can't deny diet has been an important factor. Psychologist Guy (talk) 19:18, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

You are correct, wikipedia is misrepresenting veganism, by suggesting that it is mainly dietary. The usage of "particularly in diet" is completely incorrect.

The correct definition is: "Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals" ~ The Vegan Society

The wikipedia definition has been incorrect for many years, and they do not appear to allow the page to be corrected. This would have been pointed out to wikipedia many times. After many years of donations, they will not be receiving any more of my money. Begenuine8 (talk) 02:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Your definition of veganism is incorrect, and misleading, it has been this way for years, and there is no doubt this has been pointed out to you many times, yet it remains incorrect. Why is this? Veganism is not a diet.

The term veganism was coined by The Vegan Society, their definition is not up for dispute

"Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals." Begenuine8 (talk) 02:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

The Vegan Society definition of veganism changed many times in the past. Their original definition of veganism in 1945 was "the practice of living on fruits, nuts, vegetables, grains, and other wholesome non-animal products" . The claims about veganism being a philosophy came years later.

The line on the article "Veganism is the practice of abstaining from the use of animal products—particularly in diet—and an associated philosophy that rejects the commodity status of animals", is accurate per the sourcing. Psychologist Guy (talk) 11:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Ok, here is my suggestion for a lead sentence that reflects this without downplaying the other aspects of the lifestyle: "Veganism is the practice of abstaining from the use of animal products and the consumption of animal source foods — and an associated philosophy that rejects the commodity status of animals." If a reliable source is needed, I would suggest this one: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11016330/

What do you think? --Countryboy603 (talk) 22:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Cureus has a poor academic reception and has been accused of predatory publishing. I doubt many would agree the source qualifies as a good WP:RS. Psychologist Guy (talk) 22:30, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Ok, here's another source: https://www.academia.edu/3641785/Resisting_the_Globalization_of_Speciesism_Vegan_Abolitionism_as_a_Site_of_Consumer_Based_Social_Change

Is this a reliable source?

Countryboy603 (talk) 18:47, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Looks good to me.IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 03:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

FYI the modern vegan society definition is already cited on the article in the "definition" section Psychologist Guy (talk) 12:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

FYI the contemporary definition of veganism, which has not changed in many years, is the definition that this article should commence with. Anything else is a deliberate misrepresentation of the truth. Veganism is not a diet, vegetarianism is, they are two completely different things. Begenuine8 (talk) 12:07, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Your profile on wikipedia clearly states your bias, as a vegetarian you should remove yourself from any, and all interactions with vegan pages. Misplaced Pages should be treating them as completely different subjects, since they are.

Your claim of "objectivity" is a mockery to the premise of Misplaced Pages. Your sole interest is to pretend that vegetarianism is ethical, deliberately contriving similarities with veganism, and grouping the two together at every opportunity. It is a wonder you do not boast about blocking the correction of this page on your profile, there is still some room for more boasting... Begenuine8 (talk) 12:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Your account is likely to be blocked if you continue with that because you are far too aggressive and are making personal attacks. It's not worth responding to your false allegations and misinformation. I founded WP:VV. We already have a definition section of veganism on the article and a lead that is well sourced. WP:CON if you want your suggestions to be added to the article, but doubtful because we have already had this discussion many times before. Check the archives. Psychologist Guy (talk) 12:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Begenuine8 has been indef blocked for making personal attacks. If any other users want to continue this discussion make sure to suggest good WP:RS. As noted already in the "Definition" section of the article, we do cite the Vegan Society's modern definition of veganism. Psychologist Guy (talk) 15:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

lack of criticism page

If Veganism is to be seen as a philosophy then they’re must be a page dedicated to criticism. This isn’t due to the philosophy being “wrong” however the page currently presents this particular idea as being unfalsifiable thus unable to be disputed. 2601:201:8E00:8740:180:C03A:A7B3:F4C9 (talk) 12:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

"Must be" only if there are sufficient reliable sources on the matter. Provide them. YBSOne (talk) 12:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories: