Template talk:Veganism and vegetarianism/Archive 1

src: media.qt2systems.com

Video Template talk:Veganism and vegetarianism/Archive 1

Restaurants

What are the criteria for including restaurants on this template? Not all seem especially noteworthy. I don't think that section is very relevant and should be perhaps removed. - AKeen 20:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Which ones do not appear to be noteworthy? The section is relevant to vegetarian cuisine and is appropriate. --Viriditas | Talk 21:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, certain vegetarian restaurants are clearly important - but theoretically, as it stands, any vegetarian restaurant could be included here. I see Chicago Diner as somewhat significant, or at least historic, to vegetarianism, whereas I see Maoz as a restaurant chain that just happens to be vegetarian. As more articles are created for vegetarian restaurants, inclusion criteria will have to be considered. - AKeen (talk) 17:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Maps Template talk:Veganism and vegetarianism/Archive 1

Vegetarianism/Veganism activists

I think vegetarian/vegan activists should be included (Campbell, Robbins, and, though she is most famous for studying gorillas, Goodall.) All the best, Kayau (Talk to me! See what I've done! Sign my guestbook!) 10:42, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

src: 4.bp.blogspot.com

Freeganism

I took freeganism off because most of the freegans i know are not vegan, they aren't even vegetarian.

thanks you --Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.17.202.105 (talk) 20:52, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they aren't vegetarian, but they never collaborate with the animal exploitation so they are in part linked to veganism. Another fact is that "The word "freegan" is a portmanteau of "free" and "vegan"", so I see a strong connection and I think it would be in the template. Akhran (talk) 11:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

src: 1.bp.blogspot.com

Diets

There should be a 'diets' section listing vegetarian diets and a seperate 'related diets' listing all the others, pescetarian etc. As it stands it is misleading. I can see that both 'Semi-vegetarianism' and 'Vegetarianism and religion' are highlighted but I don't think highlighting makes it clear enough that these are meant to be headings and that the following links are not related to the main heading on the left of the table. Muleattack (talk) 22:17, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

src: halsanutrition.com

Food and Drink

This section is ridiculous, where is the line drawn on whats included? This could end up listing hundreds of links. Muleattack (talk) 22:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I've removed brand name products from the list (shreese, tofurkey etc) and individual plant milks (soy milk, rice milk etc.) as these are covered by broader articles listed. Muleattack (talk) 22:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Lets's keep clear animal product substitutes like tofu and veggie sausage and leave out things that non-vegetarians eat everyday, because if you're going to include yogurt, bread and cake, then why aren't ice tea, jelly beans and potato salad on the list? The list of all food that does not contain meat is going to be near endless. Or better yet, delete that entire "food and drink" section if obvious finite non-controversial list can't be made. Ice cream, really? If you disagree, speak up, otherwise I might clean this section up. Sequel.sa (talk) 13:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking the same. Including things like bread seems odd. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 00:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

src: cdn-b.william-reed.com

Emerson

What is the source that Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau were vegetarians? Both were hunters. Thoreau's Walden includes a scene where he eats a woodchuck, I believe. A better choice would be Amos Bronson Alcott, who promoted a vegan lifestyle at Fruitlands. Either way, the main biographical article on these people should represent their vegetarianism (with a reliable source) before the template is added to their page. --Midnightdreary (talk) 10:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Mark Twain is on the list too? Egads! --Midnightdreary (talk) 11:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

src: s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com

People

I've taken the list of people back to doctors, academics and scientists who specifically write about veganism or vegetarianism. To add other writers would mean the list will get very long, and it'll be hard to decide who to include. So I removed a few names today of people who didn't fit in the doctor/scientist/academic category. I also removed Tom Regan. Although he's an academic and vegan, veganism is not his focus (except indirectly via animal rights), unlike Francione who does focus on it. Hope that's okay. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:59, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Well done. The list of people could get very long otherwise, per list of vegetarians and list of vegans. Nirvana2013 (talk) 10:10, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I've added another section for authors who write specifically on topics related to veganism which places limits yet allows other people to be included. -Classicfilms (talk) 16:16, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

src: i2.wp.com

Ethics

I am wondering about the lack of strict non-violence being mentioned in the secular ethics section. Ahimsa, as I understand it, is not a religious thing, but a philosophical standing. Should it be moved from religious ethics to secular ethics? Perhaps links to western philosophers could also be added to the secular ethics section. Perhaps links to Peter Singer? -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.239.184.126 (talk) 21:08, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Added nonviolence. Nirvana2013 (talk) 07:27, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Category:Vegans

There's a discussion here about whether to delete this category, in case anyone wants to comment. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:12, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Scope needs expansion

People and films listed here work beyond the scope of Vegan, towards the term "Whole Foods, Plant-Based." One is Dr. T. Colin Campbell, Ph.D. who states in an NYT article:

"I don't use the word "vegan" or "vegetarian." I don't like those words [....] The idea is that we should be consuming whole foods. We should not be relying on the idea that genes are determinants of our health. We should not be relying on the idea that nutrient supplementation is the way to get nutrition, because it's not. I'm talking about whole, plant-based foods."

--Nutrition Advice From the China Study". The New York Times, January 7, 2011.

In terms of WP:NPOV, the vegan articles right now omit the fact that the group associated with Professor Campbell do not use the term vegan and choose Whole Foods, Plant Based. I'm not interested in getting into an edit war on this topic re: this article and related articles, but I do think that the Wikipedia needs to make this distinction, perhaps by making a separate article, something like Whole Foods, Plant-Based Diet. This would resolve the issue of making edits to other articles while maintaining WP: NPOV. -Classicfilms (talk) 16:58, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

It's nevertheless true that Campbell advocates a vegan diet. He didn't call himself a vegan because of the ethical aspects, not all of which he subscribes to, but he is still a dietary vegan. And he now does use the term "vegan" and "plant-based diet" interchangeably (see here, for example): "In addition to losing weight, a vegan diet will improve the health of those who consume it - cholesterol, blood pressure, cardiovascular risk and the risk of cancer are all lower in people who consume a plant-based diet."

The risk of having a separate article about a plant-based diet is that it will end up being a POV fork; a vegan diet is a plant-based diet. We do have articles about different kinds of plant-based diets, e.g. Whole foods. Perhaps you could expand that, rather than creating another one? It currently includes dairy products, but I'm not sure that it should. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 17:35, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not attached to either creating a new article or expanding - either way is fine with me. However, I am perplexed by the statement that he advocates a vegan diet. He clearly states that he doesn't. In fact, in his writing, the term isn't used, because the scope of his work and those who work with him, have a different focus. The focus is on more than not eating meat or dairy but eating whole, unprocessed foods. The connotation is different and the Wikipedia is not reflecting this fact. A few people listed here and the film, Forks Over Knives do not use the term vegan - they all use variations of Whole Foods, Plant-Based which is different, something Campbell clearly states above. We get into WP:OR if we substitute one term for the other.

A solution is to go back to my idea for this template of adding the term Whole Foods, Plant Based to the categories. My suggestion for a new article with that term would avoid changing the Plant-based diet disamb. page which does not clearly cover it. --Classicfilms (talk) 17:46, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I quoted Campbell above using the terms "vegan" and "plant-based diet" interchangeably on his website. He doesn't (or didn't when I last checked) subscribe to ethical veganism, but he does advocate a vegan diet, and he does use that term. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 17:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I see now that that article I quoted from his website was written by someone else. Still, he does advocate a vegan diet and is hosting articles advocating it. I think what he's trying to do is promote the diet without the ethics/ideology, so that it spreads further and people are not put off by it. But lots of people are doing that and still using the term "vegan". SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:07, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I must admit that as I was attempting to work on the disambig links in the article about Colin I became confused as how to go about making changes there because of his lack of commitment to either vegan or vegetarianism. So I just left it alone. It would make it easier to add another term as suggested above. Just my opinion of course. Anyone who would like to take a crack at the disambig link on his article that would be great too. You too can help. TattØØd?aitre§ l?T? tÅL? 01:59, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

src: 4.bp.blogspot.com

Is it time to split vegetarianism and veganism into two separate templates?

The template is getting too big and vegetarianism/veganism are really two different philosophies/lifestyles, so just as Watson did in 1944, is it time to make a split? Nirvana2013 (talk) 08:09, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not seeing how they are different, except for the people who follow the vegan philosophy in addition to the diet. After all, veganism is an aspect of vegetarianism. So, to me, and going strictly by the diets, saying that vegetarianism and veganism are not the same is like stating that ovo-lacto vegetarianism and vegetarianism are not the same. Both are vegetarianism, with one encompassing all vegetarian diets. And attempts to distinguish vegetarianism from veganism have gone on at the Veganism talk page, without much success because of definition aspects; see, for example, Talk:Veganism/Archive 7#Varieties of veganism. Flyer22 (talk) 10:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

They are pretty different, even if veganism is a subset of vegetarianism and many vegans were once ovo-lacto vegetarian. Dietary vegans believe dairy and eggs are unhealthy and can lead to disease (high in saturated fat and cholesterol; cause of breast/testicular cancer, osteoporosis, arthritis, obesity, diabetes, asthma etc.), whilst many vegetarians eat them daily. Ethical vegans believe dairy and eggs cause animal suffering. Nirvana2013 (talk) 06:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I've seen you around vegetarian topics for some time. I'm not sure if you recognize my username in that same regard, or don't think that you've ever seen my username before, but I'm a vegetarian and I regularly edit the Vegetarianism article. I'm aware of what some vegans think, which is why I pointed to that aforementioned discussion. While I will usually object to a person using vegetarian interchangeably with vegan, especially in the case of calling a vegetarian a vegan, that is only because not all vegetarians are vegans or because I know that the two are commonly distinguished among vegetarian and/or vegan groups/sources. However, all vegans are vegetarians, which is why veganism is an aspect/subset of vegetarianism. This is also why the lead of the Veganism article notes that dietary vegans are referred to as strict vegetarians and why the article later notes how the term veganism came about to describe strict vegetarians. Really, veganism, with or without regard to the vegan philosophy, is classified as strict vegetarianism by many reliable sources. All that stated: When taking into account semi-vegetarianism, it could be argued that not all subsets of vegetarianism are vegetarian; but then again, most reliable sources don't define semi-vegetarianism as vegetarianism anyway (whether we're talking about what the vegetarian diet is or are referring to the term semi-vegetarianism). Flyer22 (talk) 07:11, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Semi-vegetarianism

As seen with this edit, Randy Kryn removed Template:Veganism and vegetarianism from the Semi-vegetarianism article; and as seen with this edit, Randy Kryn removed semi-vegetarianism from Template:Veganism and vegetarianism. With both edits, Randy Kryn stated "not applicable", and I reverted asking Randy Kryn to explain how these matters are not applicable. I assume that Randy Kryn means that semi-vegetarianism is not actually vegetarianism. I argue that whether one believes it to be vegetarianism or not, the template belongs in the Semi-vegetarianism article and semi-vegetarianism belongs on the template because both are vegetarianism topics, which is why we discuss semi-vegetarianism in the Vegetarianism article. I argue that these templates are for readers who might want to look at other vegetarian topics and issues, whether it's vegetarian foods or the fact that many or most vegetarians despise semi-vegetarianism. Flyer22 (talk) 21:17, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: With this and this edit, respectively, I alerted editors of Talk:Vegetarianism and Talk:Veganism to this matter. Flyer22 (talk) 21:23, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Discussion

• Hi. I thought I'd give it a try, and yes, imnho those pages have nothing to do with vegetarianism. Worth a discussion at least, but I won't keep at it or revert, just wanted to test the waters. To me a vegetarian doesn't eat any meat, and a vegan no animal products (I would like to be a vegan, but still eat Quorn products, which contain egg white, and you can catch me eating pancakes a few times a year. I'm a Semi-vegan, or a Pancakearian) (and Nan, can't help but eating Nan at Indian buffets). I don't despise semi-vegetarianism, it's just not a real vegetarian topic to me. Good to meet you, and keep up the great work. Randy Kryn 21:29 18 March, 2015 (UTC)
• Support inclusion. Semi-vegetarianism, or as it is more popularly known, "flexitarianism", is on the continuum of vegetarianism, as is veganism. Therefore, not only should the template be included, but its name should be changed to simply "vegetarianism", since veganism is also on the continuum as "strict vegetarianism". The idea that there is some kind of separation between semi-vegetarianism, vegetarianism, and strict vegetarianism, is mistaken. Most strict vegetarians do not become vegans overnight, and those that do generally don't last very long. Lifelong vegetarians start as flexitarians, move slowly into vegetarianism, and become either semi-vegans or strict vegetarians. There are no artificial boundaries here, and by creating them, this becomes more of a religious discussion than a dietary one. So, in addition to including the template, I also support changing the template name to simply "vegetarianism". I fully realize that the hardcore vegans will refuse to accept this proposal, as they don't seem to understand the most basic aspects of how people become vegetarians and how they eat on a long-term basis. Viriditas (talk) 21:40, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

I celebrate the day I went off meat every year, but not the day I stopped eating most meat. I recall them both, but only one is the real day I stopped eating "meat" and became a vegetarian, and that one I celebrate with either a great Indian buffet or with the best lentils and rice recipe you've ever imagined (I am a fine lentils and rice cook, blowing my own horn and patting myself on the back with one hand while holding a wooden spoon in the other). Vegetarianism doesn't seem like a continuum to me, at least one that includes eating meat. Can't understand other viewpoints on this one, and as I said, this was a one-time edit to test the waters, and must acknowledge that other people and editors see vegetarianism as somehow containing eating meat (to which I can only respond: huh?). Randy Kryn 21:43 18 March, 2015 (UTC)

Vegetarianism is a continuum, and this is proven through studies of how people begin by 1) limiting animal products, and the progress to 2) eliminating animal products. Again, this is not black and white, nor either or, this is a continuum, where people move up and down; very few stay on the right side of the continuum. You are free to treat this as a black and white, religious issue, but any cursory glance at the literature shows that it is not. The problem is that you see this as an animal abolitionist would: any form of meat eating (or animal use on the right side of the spectrum), according to you, eliminates vegetarianism. However, in the real world, the facts are quite different. Many potential, full-time vegetarians start out as semi-vegetarians. This means they have eliminated or reduced animal products from some aspect of their diet, but they have not yet moved to the right of the spectrum. There are good arguments showing this can have more of an impact than a minority of people practicing strict vegetarianism (veganism). You will not, however, ever recognize this fact, because this is a religious issue for you. Viriditas (talk) 21:58, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

To add on to Viriditas's point, I started out as a pescetarian (after being a general meat-eater until age 12). Flyer22 (talk) 22:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello Viriditas. Tis not a religious issue with me (huh?). I thought the word 'Vegetarian' means a person who doesn't eat meat. So if anything it's an issue of definition. Taking this logic, if I started a template on "Anne Hathaway" (and don't mind if I do) I might add "Eric Andre" with the reasoning that he's also an actor, and a chromosome or two away from being a woman, so he's almost Anne Hathaway. I doubt if he can sing like her though, so I might leave him off. But religious? And semi-vegetarian? Same as a semi-Anne Hathaway - it just isn't her. To Flyer22: I don't even know what a pescetarian is, and will look it up forthwith. EDIT: Ah, seafood. A complicated name for a pretty simple storyline. I used to like tuna, and just last week was wondering if one of these new vege companies will make a faux-tuna! Randy Kryn 23:14 18 March, 2015 (UTC)

I would have jumped right into full-on vegetarianism if I hadn't been told by different people (and a film that I don't know the name of) that fish and/or other seafood is not meat. Flyer22 (talk) 23:41, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, see Fasting and abstinence in the Roman Catholic Church for more contradictory information on how this idea gained hold in Catholic countries and communities. Apparently, if you ask for a vegetarian dish in some countries, such as Argentina, they bring you seafood. Viriditas (talk) 07:15, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

The common belief that fish is not meat and that eating fish is vegetarian (a belief aided by various dictionary definitions, among other sources) is why we have the matter addressed in the lead of the Vegetarianism article and lower in its Varieties section. Many people who have a plant-based/fish diet, even knowing of the term pescetarian, call themselves vegetarian...either because they don't consider fish (or other seafood) to be meat or because they think pescetarian is too much of a neologism while the term vegetarian is easily recognizable. Or it's for both reasons. Flyer22 (talk) 07:58, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Since it's only the three of us on a park bench (and thanks for all the fish!), and speaking of neologisms, can we change the word-that-few-know on the template to the name of the article, Semi-vegetarianism (odd writing that, like saying a foul ball over the wall is a semi-homerun in baseball)? If one purpose of its inclusion on the template is to give people the option of reading about the concept of starter-vegetarianism, we should at least give them a link which describes the concept and not a new word which they will likely not even notice. Thanks. Randy Kryn 10:48 19 March, 2015 (UTC)

Yes, regarding this, go for the clearer wording of semi-vegetarianism; we should point to the whole article instead of to a section of it anyway. Flyer22 (talk) 19:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Changed it, thanks, and you're right, to the full page and not a redirect to a section. Wonder if there are more entries for that section, as long as it's staying. Can't think of any offhand, but there must be some more, no? If only pancakearian were a real word. Randy Kryn 00:37 20 March, 2015 (UTC)

• Support, per what I stated above. Also, per what Viriditas stated above, I argued similarly of vegetarianism and veganism in the #Is it time to split vegetarianism and veganism into two separate templates? discussion. And, Randy Kryn, thanks for explaining and for formatting this section in the form of a Discussion aspect. Flyer22 (talk) 21:41, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome, but I didn't add the discussion section head. Would write more but I've made myself hungry with all of this talk about food, so...two Quorn chicken sandwiches with Daiya cheese, relish, mustard, and blue corn chips on the side coming soon! Randy Kryn 21:47 18 March, 2015 (UTC)

I see that Viriditas added the heading; I was going to check in the edit history to make sure that my thanking you for the matter was correct, but you beat me to the reply on that. Flyer22 (talk) 22:00, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Films

Hi, what are the requirements to add Films to the template? I added some of the local favourites to the Vegetarian Society (Singapore) article, but I don't like to create redundant content and films are a global thing. Trying to understand the concept, please help. Referenced article: Vegetarian_Society_(Singapore)#Films_about_Vegetarianism_.28selection_only.29 --Never stop exploring (talk) 01:57, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Huggi, I think any films about vegetarianism and veganism would be okay to add, so long as we have articles on them. If it gets to the point where we have too many, we can think again, but for now it should be okay to add them. Sarah ^(talk) 17:45, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Writers

I've removed the writers' section at least twice, but it keeps being restored. It is making the template too long, so that it now has to be collapsed in articles. Lots of people write about vegetarianism and veganism nowadays so it really makes no sense to include them. Someone could create a list or category and we could add a link to that instead. Sarah ^(talk) 01:10, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

What's the criteria for people or into the "Physicians, academics" section? Would: George_Jacobs_(educator,_vegan) fit in? --Never stop exploring (talk) 14:34, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

It would be good to keep that section devoted to scientists and other academics notable for their focus on vegetarianism or veganism, not just people who've written about it among other issues or who've published recipe books. Sarah ^(talk) 15:15, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, when I wrote those last few words I didn't realize that Jacobs's involvement is to have written recipe books! I apologize if that came across as snark directed at him personally. I meant only that lots of people do this nowadays, and if we were to include all the ones with articles, the template would be very long. So my thinking is to restrict it to people who are notable for focusing on vegetarianism/veganism, and/or who are known for having made some kind of difference to the way people eat or view these issues. Sarah ^(talk) 23:21, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

No problem, how about creating a complete list of Vegetarian writers and include more, but only select a few or just the list-article for that topic? If everyone is doing films about vegetarians, we can always do a list :) --huggi - never stop exploring (talk) 13:25, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Plant-Based missing?

Plant-based diet as a term should appear in this template somewhere or it should be the name of the template. A simple Google Search of the term "Plant Based Diet" led to "About 13,800,000 results":

• https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Plant+Based+diet

-Classicfilms (talk) 00:54, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I added the page onto the template and the template to the page. The page itself is little more than a stub, and could easily be merged into the Vegetarian article, and the name redirected to it. Will take a look at it some time soon. Randy Kryn 14:44, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Randy, that's not a stub, but a dab page, so it ought not to have the template on it. The problem with the term "plant-based diet" is that those who use it do so inconsistently, so it has come to mean all things to all people: veganism, vegetarianism, semi-vegetarianism. I believe it's mostly used now to imply a diet with little meat, i.e. semi-vegetarian. The best thing might be to leave it as a dab page, which is probably the most informative option for readers. Sarah ^(talk) 15:02, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't know if I quite agree with you Sarah regarding the lack of a definition. The phrase "Plant-Based" is used as an umbrella term to describe a variety of approaches that emphasize plants. Before the references were removed the other day from the "Plant-Based Diet" page, there was a highly respectable reliable source from Kaiser Permanente's medical journal -

• Philip J Tuso, MD; Mohamed H Ismail, MD; Benjamin P Ha, MD; Carole Bartolotto, MA, RD. "Nutritional Update for Physicians: Plant-Based Diets." The Permanente Journal (Kaiser Permanente). 2013 Spring; 17(2):61-66.

Here is a quote from the section of the article titled "Definitions of Plant-Based Diets":

"The following is a brief summary of typical diets that restrict animal products. A key distinction is that although most of these diets are defined by what they exclude, the plant-based diet is defined by what it includes. Vegan (or total vegetarian): Excludes all animal products, especially meat, seafood, poultry, eggs, and dairy products. Does not require consumption of whole foods or restrict fat or refined sugar. Raw food, vegan: Same exclusions as veganism as well as the exclusion of all foods cooked at temperatures greater than 118°F. Lacto-vegetarian: Excludes eggs, meat, seafood, and poultry and includes milk products. Ovo-vegetarian: Excludes meat, seafood, poultry, and dairy products and includes eggs. Lacto-ovo vegetarian: Excludes meat, seafood, and poultry and includes eggs and dairy products. Mediterranean: Similar to whole-foods, plant-based diet but allows small amounts of chicken, dairy products, eggs, and red meat once or twice per month. Fish and olive oil are encouraged. Fat is not restricted. Whole-foods, plant-based, low-fat: Encourages plant foods in their whole form, especially vegetables, fruits, legumes, and seeds and nuts (in smaller amounts). For maximal health benefits this diet limits animal products. Total fat is generally restricted."

It fits the definition of MOS:LIST more than it does WP:MOSDAB and in fact I believe we should make the change. -Classicfilms (talk) 15:36, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

I should add that the references were rightly removed from the Plant - Based page because there is now a style guide rule that states that DAB pages should not have refs (which didn't exist when we first discussed the matter on the talk page a few years ago). However, Lists do not not prohibit refs, a reason why this page should be transitioned over to a List. The fact that Randy was confused as to what the page is indicates that we need to clarify how the Wikipedia discusses the term "Plant Based." -Classicfilms (talk) 15:41, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Refs have never been added to dab pages; that's not a new thing. As your ref indicates, the diet is all things to all people. It can exclude or include meat, but is also often used to mean veganism, i.e. no animal products at all. Sarah ^(talk) 15:57, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, we did have this discussion a few years ago and that point never came up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Plant-based_diet/Archive_1#Convert_to_article_plus_reference

Now that it has, the page should be moved to a list so that we can add sources such as the one above. "Vegan" is but one term that falls under the umbrella "Plant Based" and that is something that the Wikipedia should reflect with the numerous sources out there. There really isn't a good reason to keep it as a DAB as opposed to a List. -Classicfilms (talk) 16:03, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

(unindent) I have started an RFC on the Plant - Based page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Plant-based_diet#RfC:_Should_this_article_remain_a_Disambiguation_page.3F -Classicfilms (talk) 16:14, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Poll: Plant-based diet

I wanna do a poll about Plant-based diet in the template "Veganism and vegetarianism".

Question: As it is not strict vegan or vegetarian, I would like to ask the following question: Removing the semi-vegetarianism section, because it's not related to the topic "Vegetarianism or Veganism" at all? Thanks for your feedback on this. --huggi - never stop exploring (talk) 02:36, 24 August 2015 (UTC) - edited: initially I wanted to add the Plant-based diet, but I support Randy Kryn idea to remove the entire section, if we can find another template to "host" the section: "Semi-vegetarian".

In the 1990s and up to the T. Colin Campbell quotes from 2005 which are quoted in the article, the words 'plant-based diet' was another name for a vegetarian diet. Wikipedia has led in changing that, so it seems that the term can now mean something to do with meat eating. That aside, I'd suggest that, in place of thinking about adding that page to the template, that it and the entire section "Semi-vegetarian" be removed. This template contains links to data about veganism and vegetarianism, so articles concerning these subject's polar opposite - diets which include meat - really have nothing in common with the topic. Thanks for this consideration as well. Randy Kryn 3:08, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Randy Kryn, I agree with you on the topic of removing the entire section (so I changed the poll) anyway. But in terms of knowledge to the reader, I disagree because where would you see "semi-vegetarianism" elsewhere on Wikipedia? I just had a quick look at: Carnivore and they don't use any template. And because of my personal history I will not add anything like this to the Template:Meat. But maybe you have another creative idea on this? --huggi - never stop exploring (talk) 03:57, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

They all would fit well on the meat template, and yesterday I added 'Plant based diet' to it (if I'm remembering correctly). The term 'Semi-vegetarian' refers to someone who eats meat, and doesn't really, if we were fairly looking at a vegetarian and vegan template as an accurate template, pertain to those subjects. Just because 'vegetarian' is part of its common name doesn't mean it has anything to do with vegetarianism. Randy Kryn 4:06, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Let's see what others say. And than we should ask the Template:Meat guys, before adding it there :) --huggi - never stop exploring (talk) 04:21, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

We haven't permanently removed semi-vegetarianism from the template for reasons that have already been discussed; see Template talk:Veganism and vegetarianism/Archive 1#Semi-vegetarianism. Stating that semi-vegetarianism has nothing to do with vegetarianism is false; it has more to do with vegetarianism than with meat-eating. Semi-vegetarianism is indeed one of the perspectives of vegetarianism, which is why it belongs on this template in the Perspectives field. Vegetarians comment on semi-vegetarianism, with some supporting it and some objecting to it. And then there people who are semi-vegetarian, but consider themselves vegetarian (as in the case of some pescetarians, since fish is commonly stated not to be meat). Again, see the archived discussion I linked to. And since that discussion included me, Randy Kryn and Viriditas, I have WP:Pinged Viriditas to this discussion. Flyer22 (talk) 06:34, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Regarding that earlier discussion, I will now go add Eric Andre to the Anne Hathaway template if I can find it. If the section is kept, then with the present definition of 'Plant based diet' (the earliest source on that page is 2005, and there are plenty from the early 1990s which have yet to be heard from) that's where it should go. As for the entry 'Pescetarians', I've actually met people who eat fish who think they are vegetarian, but Wikipedia does not have to give their misunderstanding of English any attention even if there is a source that claims it-is-so (like a source claiming the Lincoln Memorial is actually the Jefferson Memorial, we don't have to give it weight). I'll continue to argue that the term "semi-vegetarian" has nothing to do with the topic of this template, and like a boat listed on an airplane template, it can only hope to someday fly. Randy Kryn 12:34, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

I stand by everything I've stated on this matter, per what WP:Reliable sources state. Just like we address semi-vegetarianism in the Vegetarianism article, for reasons that should be clear to anyone via the text and sources, it should be addressed on this template. Flyer22 (talk) 08:12, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Please reread my above comment. Realizing that the section will be kept on the template, my main point then became, after expressing surprise and ranting that the term vegetarian has degraded so much lately (I haven't read the books or the literature in a long time), is that the article "Plant-based diet" should be placed in that section. That term, would you believe it, in the last few years is now becoming defined as a diet which can include meat, so it should apparently now be included in the "Semi-vegetarian" section.

But, ranting not quite over, what about placing all of the Semi-vegetarian items, including Semi-vegetarian and plant-based diet, in a "Related" section (except the fish eating vegetarians link, is that even related?) I guess it just looks strange now, with an entire section named 'Semi-vegetarian', which includes a link to the encyclopedic data about the fish, lobster, crab and oyster eating vegetarians, so near the top of the Vegan and vegetarian template. It's like apples and oranges-with-bacon. Randy Kryn 16:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

You're saying "plant-based diet" should be listed under "Semi-vegetarianism"? I don't agree, since "plant-based diet" is usually defined to the exclusion of meat. Flyer22 (talk) 07:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

"A plant-based diet is a diet of any animal (including humans) based on foods derived from plants, including vegetables, whole grains, legumes and fruits, but with few or no animal products." (with 3 resources stated on Plant-based diet. A few or no animal products means no vegetarianism or veganism possible. Therefore I suggest and agree with Randy Kryn to include it in the Semi-vegetarianism section because it is not exclusively animal free like vegetarianism/veganism. Or do you use other references for this? Thanks! --huggi - never stop exploring (talk) 07:56, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I disagree because, as I've stated, "plant-based diet" is usually defined to the exclusion of meat. This is also clear from the Plant-based diet article. Putting "plant-based diet" under "semi-vegetarianism" is not a good idea since "plant-based diet" does not only, or even mostly, pertain to semi-vegetarianism. Flyer22 (talk) 01:45, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

That's not a problem. Kind of same same but different (no worries). I'll invite you to copy (the bellow) draft "types of vegetariansism" and add your view as "flyer-draft with Types of Vegetarianism" to make it clear what you mean. Because than we can see difference between your view and mind (logic step). And if you agree, we can add a new poll. But I'm also open for another procedure. --huggi - never stop exploring (talk) 04:16, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

huggi-draft with Types of Vegetarianism: Types of Vegetarianism (fulltime/part-time)

We're writing about grouping things or put things into a class. Because of this, there might be a logic requirement of defining the types of vegetarianism before we group them, as the current article Vegetarianism#Varieties is a bit "diluted" from my POV.

Vegetarians could be divided into two categories in fulltime (eats no meat, +vegan no animal products) and part-time (eats meat at times) treatment:

• Fulltime vegetarians (also called "hard", "closed", "strict", or "permanent vegetarians"): Template:Cite required
• Part-time vegetarians (also called "soft", "open", "empirical", or "temporal vegetarians"): Template:Cite required

That's all on that view-point for now. --huggi - never stop exploring (talk) 01:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

huggi-Draft to group: Semi-vegetarianism (came up after the types of vegetarianism) is the Perspective of Veganism and vegetarianism:

• Veganism: Raw veganism, Fruitarianism
• Vegetarianism: Ovo vegetarianism, Lacto vegetarianism, Ovo-lacto vegetarianism AND Vegetarian #1

(#1: unmentioned here, the one without ovo, lacto, but maybe honey consumption - if you don't agree, let's leave it for the moment)

BUT we're discussion the Semi (meaning "half", not full, <99,999%) vegetarians (which is listed above) with a Non-denominational (religions) and cultural view. I will explain why each article (of course my POV) belongs here:

• Semi-vegetarianism: Economic vegetarianism, Environmental vegetarianism, Vegetarianism and religion (all religions), Macrobiotic diet, Plant-based diet

Reason to list the following articles here is mainly because of:

• the dimension of Time (half means, it can be Part-time) and
• the dimension of Circumstance (it is allowed to eat Meat and of course there is no food police who controls that)

• • Economic vegetarianism: The motivation to be economic vegetarian is depending on financial aspects. If the person has enough money, they cannot become an economic-veggie? Of course if you include Sustainability then it's already another dimension. Besides sustainability I'm not aware of any other rule, saying a economic vegetarian cannot eat meat.

• • Environmental vegetarianism: The motivation to be environmental vegetarian is the environment. If the environment is okay no need to be support it anymore? Of course if you include Sustainability then it's already another dimension. Besides sustainability I'm not aware of any other rule, saying a environmental vegetarian cannot eat meat.

• • Vegetarianism and religion I have to admit, that I had a complete different view before I was traveling the world. As of my understanding there is no world religion (which is practiced by a large amount of people, notable) which requires or excludes people who are not 100% vegetarian or even vegan (correct me if I'm wrong). My take on Vegetarianism and religion is, that 99% of these people are part-time vegetarians.

• • Macrobiotic diet it can contain meat, therefore it's part-time.

• • Plant-based diet it can contain meat, therefore it's part-time.

• • In the meantime see also Talk:Semi-vegetarianism, where other semi-vegetarianism are discussed (for e.g. Pollotarian, Pescatarian, Pollo-pescetarian, and maybe other not 100% vegetarian topics are placed.

That's all on that view-point POV for now. --huggi - never stop exploring (talk) 04:16, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Veganism

Hi, Randy Kryn. Why the template is name "veganism and vegetarianism"? Veganism is one of the variations of vegetarianism. There are different variations of diets, but the common name of template must be "Vegetarianism". Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 19:40, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi. The two topics are separated on Wikipedia, and are related but very different, and each have numerous articles. There was a concern recently that another editor was trying to combine the two topics. Vegans eat nothing from animals, vegetarians do. Night and day. And check out semi-vegetarianism as a topic, which I've argued has nothing to do with vegetarianism. By the way, I hope you had a good Christmas (we semi-celebrate Russian Christmas in our family). Randy Kryn 19:47, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes, I agree with you. I have English roots, Christmas was celebrated on 25 December. Today is the birthday of my sister Diana. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 19:59, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

May her birthday be full of happiness. I assume you agree about the semi-vegetarian topic, which I find just short of ridiculous, but sources exist and there's very little or nothing anyone can do about it. An editor once was going to add the topics of eating camels and kangaroos to the semi-vegetarian page and I urged him to go ahead, so we could have surf and turf and hump and jump vegetarian dishes. Randy Kryn 20:15, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Federal Chancellor (NightShadow), it seems that you are going by recent comments I made; I stand by those comments, but I don't see a need to have this template simply titled "Vegetarianism." I once felt that it should be titled that. But veganism is its own entity despite being a subset of vegetarianism, and the two are distinguished often enough. So I agree with this revert by Randy Kryn. I've already told Randy Kryn at Talk:Semi-vegetarianism that I was not trying to combine vegetarianism and veganism at that article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

I just reviewed my comments at Template talk:Veganism and vegetarianism/Archive 1. I don't see where I once felt that the template should simply be titled "Vegetarianism." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:09, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Flyer22 Reborn, and my apologies for badly miswording my above comment. The concern was solely mine, and it was resolved within the talk page edits at Semi-vegetarianism. Randy Kryn 01:23, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Standards for inclusion

What is the standard for the inclusion of media-related links? Why some but not others? Andrew. Z. Colvin o Talk 05:45, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Source of article : Wikipedia