Talk:Veganism

Trimming Article (completed Oct 2025)

This article seems to have a lot of information that duplicates other pages, could be moved tot hose pages, or removed altogether. It is also slightly long. I propose to address this changes in good faith. All the same, let's discuss here proactively about some of these topics if you disagree. Or, simply revert any change I made that you feel is relevant. No hard feelings, I just ask you add the reason it should be included in the notes.

Examples of what can be trimmed/moved, imho:

- Lead Section: the following two lines are duplicating information from above - directly, and indirectly. "A person who practices veganism may do so for personal health benefits or to reduce animal deaths, minimize animal suffering, or minimize their ecological footprint. Fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, grains and mushrooms are the basic elements of vegan food."

- Origins section: The history of vegetarianism should be a summary of the vegetarian page only.

- Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011: These are proposals only, and can be removed until these proposals are enacted, if ever.

- History of alternative food movements: This starts with vegetarian movements, are they relevant on this page? It could be replaced with a bit on 7th Day Adventists

- Prevalence by country: Seems to be a hard-to-maintain duplicate of the parent page.

- Veganism by demographic subgroup: The table in its current form isn't very useful - it doesn't compare to the wider population. With most of it from a 287 sample size, it can probably be summarized or even removed Sklabb (talk) 13:50, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2025

Excerpt from Article with error: "By 2016, 49% of Americans were drinking plant milk, and 91% still drank dairy milk.[98] In the U.K., the plant milk market increased by 155 percent in two years, from 36 million litres (63 million imperial pints) in 2011 to 92 million (162 million imperial pints) in 2013.[99] There was a 185% increase in new vegan products between 2012 and 2016 in the U.K.[87] In 2017, the United States School Nutrition Association found 14% of school districts across the country were serving vegan school meals compared to 11.5% of schools offering vegan lunch in 2016.[100]" Change 91% to 51%, in "By 2016, 49% of Americans were drinking plant milk, and 91% still drank dairy milk." This seems like a mathematical error. Computer-Guy.88 (talk) 18:41, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

 Not done The source refers to 91% of people as still consuming dairy milk. While an overwhelming majority of Americans consume dairy milk (91 percent), it is most commonly used as an addition to other food (69 percent), such as cereal, or as an ingredient (61 percent). Just 57 percent of consumers drink dairy milk by itself. Happy editing, Slomo666 (talk) 19:42, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

This Entire Page is Riddled With Misinformation

Veganism is not a diet, lifestyle or an environmental movement. Veganism as defined by it's creators is "The word veganism shall mean the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals." Only that part of the page is correct other info is the hijacking of the term veganism and further misinformation. ~2026-69390-9 (talk) 13:06, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

So who are these creators, and how do they control the use of the term? Acroterion (talk) 14:59, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

http://www.candidhominid.com/2011/07/leslie-cross.html

Here are the articles that defined and explained veganism. We can say that Leslie Cross is the person who defined veganism. ~2026-69390-9 (talk) 22:31, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

The problem with that definition is that it will lead to gatekeeping since not everyone agrees on what counts as animal exploitation. Hell, there are people who think keeping a pug for companionship is exploitation. --IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 22:52, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

That's not how words or the world works. There isn't only one definition for a word or an idea. Militant vegans who insist on narrowing the definition down to the point of meaninglessness are the worst enemies of the movement. No one person controls a word or an idea. Meaning is found in the myriad ways a word is used and expressed. Viriditas (talk) 23:11, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

This is not the definition given by a random person this is the definition created by the people who created the term itself and defined it. If anyone is given the permission to define a word however they want then the words become meaningless. In the creator of veganism's own words "we must put first things first; that is, we must know what we are talking about. Fortunately, the word "veganism" has a precise and simple meaning. It means: the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals. Because the question of definition is so obviously an important one, I am going to ask you to be kind enough to commit it to memory, so that when we use the word "veganism" we shall all be thinking of the same thing. Veganism then, is the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals." (The Vegan Story 1955) Rejecting this definition or fabricating other definitions in the name of veganism is simply rejecting veganism and or trying to dilute/distort what veganism is. ~2026-69390-9 (talk) 13:46, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

So every other definition but this one, before or since, is invalid (or, as you put it "fabricated"), and anyone who uses an alternate wording or definition is to be disregarded, no matter how the term is commonly used in society? And all of the sourced definitions int he article, however sourced, are to be disregarded as failing this narrow purity test? Acroterion (talk) 13:53, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

This is not a narrow purity test. These are the very articles that defined veganism. This is the original definition. How a term is commonly used in society doesn't mean anything because society has no idea about what veganism really is, they think that it's a plant based diet. If you mean the definitions in this wiki article yes, every other definition than the one given in these articles by Leslie Cross are invalid and should be disregarded. At the very least (the bare minimum that can be done at this moment) the original definition should be added to the Veganism wiki page as the original definition. "the word "veganism" has a precise and simple meaning. It means: the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals." (The Vegan Story 1955) "The word veganism shall mean the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals." (Veganism Defined 1951) ~2026-69390-9 (talk) 14:04, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

While I have no objection to including those definitions (provided they are commonly cited as foundational documents in the manner you assert), they're not something to be used as a means of excluding all other material concerning how the term is commonly described in reliable sources. That is what I mean by a purity test. Please provide documentation in secondary sources that reference these publications and definitions as widely cited. Acroterion (talk) 14:22, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

http://www.candidhominid.com/p/vegan-story.html

"Fortunately, the word "veganism" has a precise and simple meaning. It means: the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals. Because the question of definition is so obviously an important one, I am going to ask you to be kind enough to commit it to memory, so that when we use the word "veganism" we shall all be thinking of the same thing. Veganism then, is the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals." (The Vegan Story 1955)

http://www.candidhominid.com/p/veganism-defined.html

"The word veganism shall mean the doctrine that man should live without exploiting animals." (Veganism Defined 1951) ~2026-69390-9 (talk) 14:37, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

OK, how is has this all been cited in journalism and academic sources as a foundational document? See WP:SECONDARY - Wikipedia goes by how much a given concept has been cited by others as a means to establish if it is notable and fundamental, using analysis and summaries showing such currency. Acroterion (talk) 14:44, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

There is only one academic book that mentions Leslie Cross' definition of veganism (unfortunately few historians have covered him). Google books is sadly down at the moment (not permanently I hope!). I am writing a Wikipedia article for Leslie Cross. It might be easier to add a line about him to this article after I have created it. Carrot juice (talk) 15:34, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Revision of lead sentence

What do you think of the current lead sentence? Veganism can't merely be a practice since it's the opposite of carnism, which is defined as an ideology. And rejecting the commodity status of animals would mean opposing the selling and purchasing of pets, which most vegans don't oppose. Here is a suggested revision:

"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" --> "Veganism is a philosophy that opposes the use of animal products and consumption of animal source foods, based on an opposition to speciesism." IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 18:34, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm leaning toward keeping the current, it balances a tricky task reasonably well.

We need to keep a NPOV, which for the lead of this article is all but trivial. The first step towards this is to reflect reliable sources. The lead itself, as a summary, does not need to list sources, because they should be presented deeper down into the article where the more detailed view is explained. In the case I think the most relevant section is the Definition section, possibly some of History too.

When re-writing the Definition section last year, I added a scientific source for the use of the Vegan Society's one as the most popular. I do not know of any stronger source that lists speciesism as a core tenant, so I don't think the lead should mention speciesism. Sklabb (talk) 13:16, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

The sentence should be edited to make clear that the main meaning of 'Vegan' is dietary. The rest is not a standard practice of most people who call themselves vegans. What, they can't sit on leather seats in cars or keep a bird feather as decoration? 'Vegan' usually means not eating meat or animal products. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:37, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

What part of the article or reliable source supports this view? I don't see it, if anything I see the opposite. Sklabb (talk) 14:32, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

@IWannaBeSedated24 & @Randy Kryn as I forgot to get you notified. Sklabb (talk) 14:33, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Then the article should be changed. First and foremost, vegan means to not eat animals or animal products. It does not always dictate full lifestyles, although that is an option. See List of vegans, do any of them own leather shoes, purses, or leather in their transportation choices? Probably most do. An aside, I had a friend once who would calculate how much he would have to give back to the environment after traveling by plane, and pick up the equivalent amount of cans to offset it. He lost at least one girlfriend because of that. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:37, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn Let's not assert and debate our personal opinions, WP:NOTAFORUM. And please use WP:Reliable sources instead of pure speculation. Sklabb (talk) 15:49, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice Sklabb. Maybe I'm not making my point clear, which in my experience would be WP:BLUESKY and WP:COMMON. The page 'Vegetarianism' is about not eating animals. Veganism' means, to many, not eating animal products. The other things are noble and principled, but while I don't think it's just my opinion that the word means a dietary choice, yes, that's a personal opinion and maybe that's how it was commonly defined during the 1980s and '90s. The first sentence defines the overall acceptance of the word "veganism" as meaning, in full-concept mode and inclusion, not using animal skins as shoes or coats, or not riding in a car with seats made of leather, or deciding not to keep a nice looking feather that you found on a walk, in addition to the dietary choice. The wording seems to read as an either/or defining label. If true, then what is a vegan who doesn't eat animal products but who owns a couple pairs of leather shoes? Are they still a vegan, or is there another word for it now? Including the whole package as the sole definition in the lead sentence, without also defining 'vegan' as being often or usually a dietary choice, seems to be missing some of the story. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:21, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn. When people disagree on what something is, its meaning is not common sense I'd say. We have three different views for three people here so neither BLUESKY nor COMMON apply insofar as I understand them.

The Definitions section answers your question to how someone following a vegan diet but not its philosophy:

"Dietary veganism", whose practitioners are also known as "strict vegetarians", refrain from consuming meat, eggs, dairy products, and any other animal-derived substances. Sklabb (talk) 10:33, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello Sklabb. This discussion is about the content of the first sentence. As I understand them, both Bluesky and Commonsense apply when it comes to defining a vegan in the opening lead sentence, which now defines all vegans as not using any animal product (leather, feathers, sea shells, etc). Please discuss the first sentence and not sections within the overall article, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:42, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn, I'm starting to feel like I'm repeating myself but let me try one more time:

1. Because this is the lead, whatever is said should be supported deeper down the article. This is why the other sections are relevant here.
2. Now, even if this were outside of the lead, we'd still need sources backing up your suggestion. If anything, it seems in conflict with the Dietary vegans section which already has sources against your suggestion, lifting the quality bar of the kind of citation that is needed.
3. Your common sense to what veganism is conflicts with two other editors, you need to convince us and/or others to reach consensus.

Sklabb (talk) 14:00, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Yes, there is another term for it now and that is "plant-based person". It is meant to distinguish people who don't eat animal products but otherwise don't follow vegan principles from vegans. It's not just used by militant vegans - there are people who reject the label of "vegan" because of the negative connotations. IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 23:00, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

The lead sentence used to be:

"Veganism is the practice of abstaining from the use of animal product—particularly in diet—and an associated philosophy that rejects the commodity status of animals."

It was changed because many people were saying it was incorrect; that veganism isn't a diet. IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 03:29, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

IWannaBeSedated24, what do those many people call a person who doesn't eat animal products but sometimes wears leather shoes? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:44, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn, A "plant-based person". I personally find it very strange to use the word "plant-based" to describe a person, but it's become a popular way to distinguish between a vegan and someone who simply doesn't eat animal products.

https://veganfta.com/blog/2022/08/31/25-tips-about-how-to-veganise-plant-based-people/

https://wildchef.co.nz/2020/05/18/vegan-vs-plant-based/

https://open.spotify.com/episode/1cqy1iUx0tpJYKvbB1CW4g?go=1

https://extension.wsu.edu/skagit/event/how-to-thrive-on-a-plant-based-diet/2021-03-15/

https://www.amazon.com/Better-Us-Plant-based-Person-Sweatshirt/dp/B0BQFW3PPQ

https://www.quora.com/Can-a-meat-eater-be-as-healthy-as-a-plant-based-person

https://faunalytics.org/how-many-animals-does-a-vegn-spare/

https://medium.com/@robgilder/the-plant-based-protein-problem-9235e9ed33ff

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CYWu9RtfKIA

https://www.veganforum.org/threads/my-50-year-old-daughter-transitioning-to-pb-diet.18649/

https://www.borealle.com/upcoming-events-and-classes/what-should-i-cook-vegan-winter-holidays

https://www.instagram.com/p/CZchbDfMFT_/

https://www.faire.com/en-gb/product/p_ej97rm8z5t

https://animalcharityevaluators.org/research/reports/dietary-impacts/effects-of-diet-choices/

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/thrive-market-on-instagram-maybe-youre-a-plantbased-person-or-maybe-youre-just-not-feeling-the-boxed-stuff-today-either-way-this-is-an-easy-path-to-quic-video-video--538180224240005003/

https://x.com/missmayim/status/621309986040360964

https://www.thortful.com/card/quirky-card-celebrating-your-favourite-plantbased-person-655bcf499a99c74ce97ebd3f

https://www.plantbasedmealplan.com/ep-118

https://karelvredenburg.com/plants

https://truesouthmedical.co.nz/246-2/

https://www.instagram.com/p/DTnzqONiJx6/

https://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=9093193&fileOId=9093205

https://www.idealnutrition.com.au/podcasts/podcast/podcast-transcript-ep185/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363443484_Review_of_The_long_table_cookbook_Plant-based_recipes_for_optimal_health-nourishing_food_for_small_and_large_gatherings

https://www.instagram.com/p/DGRSb4cRPnq/

https://sofly.co/the-most-practical-guide-to-a-plant-based-diet/

https://www.speciesunite.com/podcast/david-benzaquen

https://www.futurekind.com/blogs/plant-based/iodine-guide?srsltid=AfmBOorhignFOk-Hanv4M97HY6gKJcbO-99vgunNMhoX9DIAFyfg7gNI

https://plantacademy.co.uk/travel-guides/ubud

https://canadianfoodstudies.uwaterloo.ca/index.php/cfs/article/download/488/392/2845 IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 17:18, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

FYI, imho this entire discussion clearly relevant to the topic if "dietary vegans/strict vegetarians/plant-based people" can be considered vegan or not. Let's not bypass the consensus forming process on the talk page by editing other parts of the lead to push any specific POV. @Randy Kryn@IWannaBeSedated24 Sklabb (talk) 12:32, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't love the vegan society definition, but nevertheless, the wikipedia article could just use it as the first sentences. BluePencil42 (talk) 02:43, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Great idea. IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 03:51, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

The present opening sentence reads: "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."

It should be closer to: "Veganism is the practice of abstaining from eating animal products, such as any meat, milk, or cheese, and many vegans also reject the commodity status of animals and abstain from using any product obtained from animals, such as furniture or clothes made from skin or hair."

Thanks, Randy Kryn (talk) 13:32, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

That is undoubtedly going to cause an outrage. Maybe we could have a section that explains the vegan diet, similar to how Jainism has a section that explains the Jain diet. IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 20:00, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

We need to focus less on diet and more on philosophy. Even after we revised the lead sentence to focus less on diet, people continue to say that the article is "riddled with misinformation" because of its focus on diet. Your suggestion is the opposite of an improvement. An actual improvement would to be to edit the entire article to focus on philosophy, with a single section focusing on diet. It might also be helpful to make a new article that's specifically about the diet - I initially thought that's what the plant based diet article was for, but it turns out that article is about diets with minimal animal products rather than no animal products (which is weird since a lot of vegans use "plant-based" to mean a person who eats NO animal products). IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 23:39, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn, @Sklabb

It seems that you want the specifics to be mentioned in the lead sentence. Ok, here is one that is closer to Randy's suggestion without reducing veganism to a diet: "Veganism is the practice of abstaining from the use of animal products (such as meat, fish and other animal seafood, leather, milk, dairy products, tallow, wool, fur, feathers, eggs, and honey) for food, clothing, and other personal uses, an an associated philosophy that rejects the commodity status of animals."

Are you ok with this? IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 01:45, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. The focus should also be on the second sentence, which defines "vegan". I can see how "veganism" contains the full Monty, an inclusion of everything animal. But a 'vegan' is also someone who doesn't eat animal products. The rest is optional, but also describes a 'vegan'. I edited the second sentence to "A person who practices veganism, either by not eating animal products or by abstaining from using animals for food and product consumerism, is known as a vegan, a term that also describes foods and materials that are compatible with veganism." and that was reverted. It seems too long-winded now, but you get the concept. How about "A vegan is someone who does not eat animal products, and many vegans are careful not to use any animal associated creation as a commodity." Randy Kryn (talk) 02:58, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn, So a person who supports cockfighting and bullfighting is vegan? IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 16:46, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't know any on an individual level and don't condone either, but if a bullfighter doesn't eat animal products then they are a vegan. The same as if they do not eat meat they are a vegetarian. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:49, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Would you say a man who beats his wife is a feminist?

According to the Vegan Society's official definition of "veganism":

"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

This suggests that "veganism" is not centered on diet or the stated health benefits of excluding animal products in one's diet, but on the conscious exclusion of animal exploitation and cruelty. You can have a plant-based diet with no animal products without being a vegan, but you can't be vegan without having a plant-based diet with no animal products. IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 20:48, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

• Comment I oppose re-framing the definition as ethical opposition to speciesism. Definitions of veganism do not generally invoke speciesism—they are generally grounded in rejecting the exploitation of animals; speciesism is concerned with animal exploitation too, but it's a philosophy that draws parallels between the agency of other species and that of people. This article covers the different aspects of veganism—ranging from ethical veganism to environmental veganism to religious or cultural veganism. We shouldn't be prioritising one particular form of veganism over another in the lead—this comes off as advocacy rather than encyclopedic commentary. The dictionary provides a basic definition based around eating and using animal products, and the Vegan Society fleshes this out a bit. The definition in the lead doesn't need to be any more complicated than that. Betty Logan (talk) 04:07, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

• Betty Logan, thanks for the comment. It should be made clear that a person who doesn't eat animal products is a vegan. The word 'vegan' does not have to include the total package, i.e. if a vegan visits a zoo then they can no longer call themselves vegan? The strict definition seems a bridge too far. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:41, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

  I don't think veganism necessarily precludes visiting a zoo, in the same it doesn't necessarily rule out buying a veggie burger from MacDonalds, although many vegans definitely rule those things out. As this BBC article says, a vegan is "someone who doesn't eat or use animal products". The pure definition verifiably extends beyond just a diet, but the diet is generally the only thing that all vegans agree on. An environmental vegan is sometimes ok with buying second-hand leather products because it doesn't directly contribute to animal exploitation and contributes to sustainability, but an ethical vegan would not because an animal still died to create the product. Vegans often make exceptions for medication (which has often been tested on animals or may even use an animal derivative), which would actually be precluded from the pure definition. I work a lot on the List of vegans, and the sources overwhelmingly only discuss diet, so it's not clear how "vegan" somebody is in other aspects of their life. So I think veganism extends beyond a diet, but there is not a strict consensus about what that entails. Usually, when someone is a dietary vegan and that choice carries over to no other aspect of their life (maybe it's a health kick or something) they are said to practice a plan-based diet. In practice, being a vegan generally involves not consuming animal derivatives as part of a diet and adopting a lifestyle that is less dependent on animal exploitation in other areas. In my experience, someone who does that would usually be regarded as a vegan or practicing veganism. Betty Logan (talk) 16:21, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

  The Vegan Society says vegans don't visit zoos. They don't just say that zoos aren’t vegan; they straight up say that vegans don’t visit zoos.

  "Vegans choose not to support animal exploitation in any form and so avoid visiting zoos or aquariums, or taking part in dog or horse racing."

  https://www.vegansociety.com/go-vegan/definition-veganism IWannaBeSedated24 (talk) 23:06, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

I'll just add my 2 cents here: The lead sentence should not give a moral/philosophical defintion of vegan ("one who abstains from all animal products") but should use a sociological definition ("people who not eat animal products or people who do not use any animal products"). The sociological defintion is way easiert to back up by sources, it is much more neutral as it does not give a normative declaration (of a single group of vegans who like to define themselve by it!) instead, it does give a neutral descriptive definition of how the term is used in practice. AetherBloom (talk) 04:35, 1 June 2026 (UTC)