This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of animal rights on Wikipedia. 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 Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. 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
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.
Veganism was one of the Social sciences and society 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.
"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."[1]
"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."[2]
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"[3]
"I have been a vegetarian all my adult life, and I am currently a dietary vegan, and I do not wear leather."[5]
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."[6]
^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.
^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.
In "Debate about animals killed in crop harvesting", Steven Davis certainly seems to misunderstand and thus misrepresent Regan's position on minimizing harm to animals. In The Case for Animal Rights, beginning on p. 302, Regan devotes considerable space to explaining why he rejects what he calls the "minimize harm principle" (i.e., the utilitarian position that Davis attributes to him). So I propose deleting Davis's claim that Regan has a utilitarian position on this issue (Regan has frequently explained why his rights position is incompatible with utilitarianism), while retaining reference to Davis's claim that "a plant-based diet would kill more than one containing beef from grass-fed ruminants." Scales (talk) 20:32, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
References
Dodgy citation
There is a citation [1] that is nearly all about vegetarianism. If it doesn't address veganism specifically, it can't be used to make claims about vegan diets, IRWolfie- (talk) 21:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Several studies use "vegetarian" to mean plant-based diet, i.e. strict vegetarian (as the text says). You have to read the study to know how they're using it, and when they don't specify they tend to mean plant-based diet. The one you removed seems to be about plant-based diets, given the point about low consumption of saturated fat. SlimVirgin(talk)22:01, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Aren't you kind of assuming? I wouldn't think it refers to veganism; vegetarians undoubtedly eat more vegetables on average than omnivores. IRWolfie- (talk) 23:45, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Biased Article
It seems to me that this article is biased, especially in it's section about health effects. There are *plenty* of counter-arguments, one need only look for them; and yet there is not mention of that fact.
