Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
Dominion (2018 film) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
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
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
This article has become incredibly biased due to bad-faith editing
This article has become incredibly biased due to potential bad-faith editing. For example, the term "documentary film" was replaced with "anti-farming film", which is clearly biased language, and also inaccurate since the film is pro plant farming. On top of that, all praise of this film has been removed, with the argument being put that the sources are biased, but a quote from the industry council, quoted by Queensland Country Life, is still included in the article. And the official website has been removed, because the youtube link includes the film, even though the youtube link is login-walled Jesse Flynn (pseudonym) (talk) 15:18, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Please keep in mind talk pages are no place for personal attacks.
For what you do describe about edits, the term anti-farming comes directly from the news source. It's no secret that these groups are anti-livestock farming, and the focus of the movie is further explained in the body with the additional sources. As for "praise" we follow WP:NPOV, so we follow what independent sources have to say primarily. The parts of the reception section that were removed were from advocacy sites like Plant-Based News that wouldn't really be appropriate here. Those parts just had the lowest quality sourcing. Generally we're going to stick to what more neutral sources have to say about reception. The industry spokesperson is however mentioned in a few sources, so there is a WP:DUE inclusion there.
As for Youtube, Misplaced Pages is not a promotional vehicle to direct people to advocacy websites or show people where to watch a movie. Anyone can still click the link and log in to view it though. KoA (talk) 15:53, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
@KoA Although I haven't looked through the article/edits in detail, I think the ideal position is somewhere between the past state of the article and your edits. I'm not sure "anti-farming" is the best description to use in the very first sentence. Many documentaries have a position or advocate for something. Bowling for Columbine, for example, is still described as a documentary rather than an "anti-gun" film in the lead. In terms of source neutrality, I don't think pro-farming/meat sources are good either. Sources like Queensland Country Life are not going to be neutral on this topic. Sam Walton (talk) 17:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
We shouldn't be citing sources from the meat industry, nor vegan advocacy websites. Both are biased. We need reviews written by academics or scientists. The Australian Meat Industry Council should be removed. Psychologist Guy (talk) 17:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Having looked around there are not any good reviews of Dominion. One website I found "UK Film Review" might not pass WP:RS so I doubt we can use it. Only beef magazines or vegan websites have reviewed the film which are not neutral. The best thing to do would be to remove the "reception" section because there is no neutral coverage. Psychologist Guy (talk) 17:52, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
That's the overall problem I had too looking for reviews. As for the Australian Meat Industry Council, I would say leave it out too if it only was simply sourced to them. That other sources reported on it independently as WP:DUE though is why it wasn't removed. That said, I'd be in favor of pruning it down so it doesn't take up as much space or excessively quoting. Just the first sentence or even paraphrasing that would be better than the current version. That would actually make it easier to stubify the article since I don't think sections aren't absolutely needed either if it's pruned down further.
On a side note, I would be careful about re-adding the term documentary as too broad. Sources outright described it as an anti-farming video, and it's better to have a bit more description about it rather than be too general. That and it gets really tricky in topics like these because there's often the question of if it's truly a documentary reflecting reality or closer to propaganda from these groups. That's why I was sticking closer to what sources described it as more directly. KoA (talk) 20:33, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
If you look at Seaspiracy it is a good article as it contains reception from academics, environmentalists and scientists. Dominion seems to have gone unnoticed. I agree it's probably best to cut down the article and stubify it. This is one of those articles that passes notability but will never be a great article. I see a couple of news website picked up on it but not much else. I have not read over all of the sources on the article currently I will take a look. Psychologist Guy (talk) 21:08, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
I took a stab and some stubbing. Not sure if the funding sources are really needed either. It seems like the main thing to focus is what exactly the film is about and some of the underlying campaigning it's being used for (one source touched on that a little).
I've seen good reviews of similar ag-related videos on this subject (or on GMOs) from scientists, so that's what I was looking for first before anything to make things easier on us. WP:PARITY can apply here though where the bar is lower for sourcing critiques, so that's why I'm cautious about removing the mention outright of criticism even if it's not ideal. At least the reduced version is less corporate-speak. It'd be better to have someone completely independent making such statements, but the current state seems ok at least for the amount of reporting by news. KoA (talk) 21:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Are you confusing this documentary (a graphic documentary about factory farming) with What The Health (a film promoting fringe theories about the health impacts of meat)? Person568 (talk) 01:44, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
If not, can you please explain how WP:PARITY is relevant, and what this has to do with science and GMOs? Again, Dominion is a graphic documentary that showcases how animals are treated in factory farms. In my opinion there's nothing even to dispute 194.223.31.222 (talk) 13:54, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Vegan advocacy group films (or other similar output) can often get into WP:FRINGE territory on depictions of norms related to livestock, so that's why I mentioned caution about that. There are similar videos on the anti-GMO front that fall into somewhat similar pitfalls, which is why I mentioned them. This particular video hasn't drawn too much academic attention, so there's not a lot to say on that front here, but it's just a background issue to keep aware of for now. Since Delforce appears to be based out of the Melbourne area, it's possible there may be more local commentary on the film from university scientists there, but I haven't seen anything yet like Pysch. Guy mentioned above. KoA (talk) 18:53, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
I mentioned anti-farming in my reply to Psych. Guy as it was straight from the source, but as for Queensland County Life, I mostly left it as an existing source. That said, it's a general ag./farm news source, and we generally consider those reliable in ag. related subjects on-wiki (they're apt to ask for interviews from us university folks even if we have something counter to industry to say). If it were from advocacy or trade groups like Beef Magazine, then I would be more cautious as you describe. KoA (talk) 21:11, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=logo}
wikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.
