Talk:Vegaphobia: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 12:59, 16 April 2018 editJoereddington (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users1,021 edits →"speaks of vegans and anti-peoples"← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 01:42, 12 August 2024 edit undo57.135.233.22 (talk) →"Vegaphobia has been framed as connected to masculinity issues." sounds like "validating" the myth "that eating meat is manly"
(49 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{old prod}}
	{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment \| course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/Louisiana_State_University/ENGL2000_(Spring_2018) \| assignments = ] }}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=C\|
	{{oldprod}}
			{{WikiProject Discrimination \|importance=Mid}}
			{{WikiProject Food and drink \|importance=Mid \|needs-image=Yes}}
			{{WikiProject Animal rights \|importance=Low \|needs-image=Yes}}
			{{WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism \|importance=High \|needs-image=Yes}}
			}}

			{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
	==Original research==
			\| age =2160
	The article contains a number of examples allegedly illustrating discrimination against vegans. Such examples must come from reliable sources which explicitly describe them as vegaphobia or similar. Otherwise it will be ] and opinions of a wikipedian, which is inadmissible.
			\| archiveprefix =Talk:Vegaphobia/Archive
			\| numberstart =1
			\| maxarchsize =100000
			\| header ={{Automatic archive navigator}}
			\| minkeepthreads =5
			\| format = %%i
			\|archivebox=yes
			\|box-advert=yes
			}}

			== Image needed ==
	Please review the articles are remove statements which do not conform wikipedia policies about citing sources and original research. ] (]) 18:57, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

			If anyone could supply a depiction of vegaphobia, it'd be much appreciated, e.g. protest signs, online posts, symbolic imagery. Uploads (see ] and ) usually have to be your own work... any vegaphobes here? Or veg(etari)ans. I tried to find images on Flickr but found nothing with the right copyright (see ]). You could also ] from any of the article sources/refs. I haven't done so because I don't think my chances are high, not knowing any of the sources personally. <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span> 15:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
	==Incomprehensible (Italianised?) English==
	In a section that deals only with women in Italy, the terms "his companions" and "his diet" are used - so who is the "he" supposedly referred to? The Italian words for "his" and "her" are the same, and this suggests that whoever wrote this doesn't know English anything like well enough to be writing in it. A little later we're told that a woman who "opened a vegan activity" (?) in a market had her "banquet" "overthrown". Not only should "overthrown" read "overturned" (you can only overthrow a government or ruler), but "banquet" means a sumptuous meal, not - as clearly intended here - a market stall. And yes, the Italian word "banchetto" can have either meaning. Here the English is quite simply incomprehensible - looks like someone made the elementary mistake of using Google Translate, which repeatedly produces such gross errors.] (]) 16:49, 9 December 2017 (UTC) On reading more of the article, I see it's full of bad English, as well as a misspelled link ('Tiblisi'). Copy-editing may not be sufficient if, as in the cases just mentioned, the errors are due to influence from another language which the editor may not know. Whoever wrote this simply should not be posting Misplaced Pages articles in "English"!] (]) 17:05, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

	==~~Frivolous~~ ~~tagging~~==		==Unreliable content==
	{{ping\|Kleuske}} why are you buying into frivolous tagging and nonsense of the IP? IP claims that this article has POV, subject lacks notability and is a hoax. Reliable sources disagree. You can't edit war over such frivolous tagging unless you have genuine concerns and before such frivolous tagging you have to raise them here. There maybe problems with WP:OR, but template for that is already there. ] (]) 20:49, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
	: This article is complete and utterly bullshit. But hey, we live in 2018, everyone gets their piece from the victimhood cake, right?] (]) 21:42, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
	:: How about we try to make this a better article instead of having an edit war with anonymous accounts? Clearly veg*ns have not been enslaved or whatever, but just because someone else had it worse doesn't make whatever happens to you right. There are clear examples of prejudice cited in the article, although perhaps could use more English-language references. ] (]) 22:25, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
	:{{re\|MapSGV}} Let's start at "buying into frivolous tagging" I disagree with the "frivolous" part and I'm not "buying into" anything. Your source indicate it's a neologism coined in 2011 and yet the article has no problem including Greek comedies about the Pythagoreans, based on a publication in "researchgate", which (AFAICT) does not mention the Pythagoreans or Pythagoras. Even if it does, we need more than a ] source.
	:;POV-check:To me the article seems to have a distinct POV, since it does not hesitate to include the works of Greek comedians (5th century BCE) under the term of a 21 century (CE) neologism. Ditto on the inquisition and the nazi's. The article posits "vegaphobia" as a '''fact''' rather than an ''opinion'', which, of course it is. Since many of the so-called instances are sourced to articles which do not mention the term ''at all'', at the very least we have a case of ] and (ipso facto) POV.
	:;Notability:Many of the sources are selfpublished articles, other sources do not mention the term '''at all'''. A quick search does not reveal a wealth of sources (rather a dearth) of sources, which makes questioning the notability a reasonable stance.
	:;hoax:This is about the only point I could agree with, since, sadly, this term seems to be coined in all earnestness.
	:That leaves us with the '''uncontested''' tags, which designate this article as a mess of ], ] and ], unworthy of Misplaced Pages.
	:The main point is that you do not remove tags without discussing them first. See ]. ] (]) 10:36, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
	:P.S. I've been bold and kicked out all the ]/] based claims, which leaves us with "someone coined the term". ] (]) 11:15, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
	::{{ping\|Kleuske}}, I don't think the sources of specific instances need to mention the exact word 'vegaphobia.' There just needs to be some sources that say that vegaphobia is the term for discrimination/prejudice/etc. against veg(etari)ans. Then any incident cited that shows prejudice against veg*ns can be included. Not ever instance of, say, Islamophobia, has the perpetrators saying "This is an aspect of my Islamaphobia" or using the word at all. ] (]) 13:58, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
	:::{{re\|NessieVL}} That, pretty much, flies in the face of ]:''"Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources."''. You basically claim the right to determine whether or not some incident is an instance of "vegaphobia". That's '''not''' how ]. ] (]) 17:12, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
	::::{{ping\|Kleuske}} See third point listed at ]. Article has issues and I was not denying that, but concerns is with frivolous tagging that I disputed. IP is engaging in disruptive editing and his motive is to get article deleted which will never happen. It is no more non notable or a hoax if it has been covered by reliable sources like Springer, Routledge, and but your earlier edit was restoring those tags. Article can either be subjected to maintenance tags about POV or original research, not both.
	::::{{ping\|NessieVL}} good point. Maybe Kleuske should mention how Misplaced Pages is maintaining articles on Islamophobia (], ]) if it is necessary for the source to always make exact mention of the term. — ] (]) 11:42, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
	:::::{{re\|MapSGV}} See ] for a reason why that islamophobia-argument doesn't work. It's no more than ]. On the other issue, see my points above. Since I have removed a lot of the offending content (especially the ]-stuff) some of the tags '''may''' be superfluous by now. They weren't when I reverted. ] (]) 11:56, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
	:::::PS. The ''"exact term"'' isn't required, but at the very least the source should state an incident happened ''because'' the victim was a veg(etari)an. None of the claims I removed had sources that said that. ] (]) 12:22, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
	::::::{{ping\|Kleuske}}, i don't think ] applies here. all that would do is force two articles, one with sources specifically citing the term vegaphobia and another for anti-veg*n discrimination that did not reference the term. I think we shouldn't get hung up on a neologism. And regarding your PS, you removed many incidences that mention anti-veg sentiment as motivation, such as the . I agree the Italian sources are not great, but the NYT specifically says "A group of people who prepared an anti-vegan provocative action, entered and started to be violent." That was not difficult to find, and I'm sure most of the other incidents mentioned could easily find supportive anglophone sources. Let's just go where the sources lead us and not go all the way to one end or the other. ] (]) 15:02, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
	:::::::] '''always''' applies (part of ], which is part of the second pillar of Misplaced Pages) and it makes no difference whether it's one article or two. You cannot combine sources to reach your own conclusions. That's not what Misplaced Pages is for, that's what ] is for. article does not state the restaurant was attacked because it was vegan or because it was seen as leftist or gay-friendly. And since the NYT does not take the proprietors word for it, neither should Misplaced Pages. In fact, the article places the incident in a broader context of the liberal west encroaching on the former USSR, which is more plausible an explanation than "vegaphobia", since no sane person gives a shit whether or someone eats meat or not.
	:::::::You're right to say we should not get hung up on a neologism that's hardly in use. Hence my suggestion to merge it into veganism, since the term "vegaphobia" is marginally notable at best. ] (]) 20:44, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
	::::::::Notable term that has been described by reliable sources I gave you in my initial comment. Term has nothing to do with content expansion, you should only observe elements that contribute to Vegaphobia. — ] (]) 23:50, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
	:::::::::{{re\|MapSGV}}You ''must'' be joking. Please tell me you are kidding... It's not found anywhere outside academia and vegan circles, so I'm rather skeptic about that "notability", given the fact that neologisms re a dime a dozen, nowadays. ] (]) 17:02, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
	::::::::::See , they are academic sources and describes the term. ] (]) 10:36, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

			This content is unreliable (primary sources, non-academic sources) and was removed from the article for good reason. outdoorlife.com is a hunting website, not an academic or scholarly secondary source. The IP who added it has since agreed it was unreliable - as I explained on their user-page . The content has been restored by Dchmelik for no valid reason. ] (]) 18:27, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
	== Proposed merge ==

	~~Since~~ ~~the~~ ~~term~~ ~~is,~~ at ~~best,~~ ~~marginally~~ ~~notable,~~ I ~~suggest~~ we ~~merge~~ ~~the~~ ~~article~~ ~~into~~ ~~the~~ ~~main~~ ~~article~~ ~~"Veganism"~~. ] (]) 11:25, 10 ~~April~~ ~~2018~~ (UTC)		:That article seemed and sounded as a real propaganda thing against veganism. I'm happy to see Misplaced Pages users are ethical enough and aware of this plain fact about what veganism mean. ] (]) 07:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
			::This article is a travesty lmao. it's insane seeing people who actively decide to live a particular lifestyle dare to compare their situation in any shape or form to something like race or sexuality. especially seeing how the vegans are usually the condescending pretentious ones. ] (]) 04:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
			:::Their situation is similar to allies of persecuted human groups. Speciesism is rightfully included in the discrimination infobox, consider vegaphobia speciesism by proxy. ] (]) 17:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

			== less masculine??? ==
	== "speaks of vegans and anti-peoples" ==

	~~What's~~ ~~anti-peoples?~~ ] (]) 06:59, 14 ~~April~~ ~~2018~~ (UTC)		I am confused ] (]) 09:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

			== "Vegaphobia has been framed as connected to masculinity issues." sounds like "validating" the myth "that eating meat is manly" ==
	I got rid of it ] (]) 12:59, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

			Though the "argument" "eating meat is manly" I have heard in the past personally, I think there is no validity to this. I think this should not be recognised as valid but debunked instead. ] (]) 02:08, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
	== I think this article is caused by mistranslations. ==
			:The nexus between meat and masculinity is well sourced in this article and elsewhere. What, exactly, is your criticism (and please be precise). ] (]) 01:42, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

			== Misplaced not criticism placed in criticism ==
	In https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Vegaphobia&diff=prev&oldid=836395625, I took out a quote because it's sourced to an english translation of an italian document, that is a section of a document that is originally in English (I think). In any case, the original 'Queer Vegan Manifesto' is here: http://animalstudiesrepository.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=acwp_aafhh and doesn't mention vegaphobia at all. Given the rest of the writing in the article, I'm willing to belive that this is a term that is only used in Italian... Does that make sense to people? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:08, 14 April 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			"Vegaphobia has been framed as an intersectional problem connected to masculinity, race and gender identity issues." is included under criticism, but it is not criticism of "vegaphobia" at all, it is a hypothesis about "vegaphobia" which validates it. There is no critique about "vegaphobia" present in that sentence, thus it should be placed elsewhere. ] (]) 10:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

			:Proposing to place it under "causes of vegaphobia". Doing that now. If anyone disagrees I expect that they'll revert my change. ] (]) 10:53, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 01:42, 12 August 2024

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Discrimination Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination 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.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Food and drink Mid‑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

Mid

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

An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

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.

Animal rights Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Veganism and Vegetarianism High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Image needed

If anyone could supply a depiction of vegaphobia, it'd be much appreciated, e.g. protest signs, online posts, symbolic imagery. Uploads (see WP:COPYRIGHT and Copyright for Wikimedia Commons) usually have to be your own work... any vegaphobes here? Or veg(etari)ans. I tried to find images on Flickr but found nothing with the right copyright (see Misplaced Pages:Upload/Flickr). You could also request use of an image from any of the article sources/refs. I haven't done so because I don't think my chances are high, not knowing any of the sources personally. ‎⠀Trimton⠀‎‎ 15:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Unreliable content

This content is unreliable (primary sources, non-academic sources) and was removed from the article for good reason. outdoorlife.com is a hunting website, not an academic or scholarly secondary source. The IP who added it has since agreed it was unreliable - as I explained on their user-page . The content has been restored by Dchmelik for no valid reason. Psychologist Guy (talk) 18:27, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

That article seemed and sounded as a real propaganda thing against veganism. I'm happy to see Misplaced Pages users are ethical enough and aware of this plain fact about what veganism mean. MehdiTaba89 (talk) 07:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

This article is a travesty lmao. it's insane seeing people who actively decide to live a particular lifestyle dare to compare their situation in any shape or form to something like race or sexuality. especially seeing how the vegans are usually the condescending pretentious ones. 217.165.137.1 (talk) 04:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Their situation is similar to allies of persecuted human groups. Speciesism is rightfully included in the discrimination infobox, consider vegaphobia speciesism by proxy. 2A02:C7C:D5F6:A300:9515:E8DD:8A6F:9FF6 (talk) 17:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

less masculine???

I am confused 41.114.152.41 (talk) 09:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

"Vegaphobia has been framed as connected to masculinity issues." sounds like "validating" the myth "that eating meat is manly"

Though the "argument" "eating meat is manly" I have heard in the past personally, I think there is no validity to this. I think this should not be recognised as valid but debunked instead. 31.20.106.40 (talk) 02:08, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

The nexus between meat and masculinity is well sourced in this article and elsewhere. What, exactly, is your criticism (and please be *precise*). 57.135.233.22 (talk) 01:42, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced not criticism placed in criticism

"Vegaphobia has been framed as an intersectional problem connected to masculinity, race and gender identity issues." is included under criticism, but it is not criticism of "vegaphobia" at all, it is a hypothesis about "vegaphobia" which validates it. There is no critique about "vegaphobia" present in that sentence, thus it should be placed elsewhere. Wallby (talk) 10:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposing to place it under "causes of vegaphobia". Doing that now. If anyone disagrees I expect that they'll revert my change. Wallby (talk) 10:53, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Categories: