Talk:Animal ethics/Archive 1

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 31 March 2020 and 19 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): FutureSLP.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why a synopsis of ethical stances regarding animal rights is useful[edit]

The animal rights page presents a viewpoint on animal rights that is not the only, and not neccesarily the best, viewpoint. The purpose of an outline like the one shown here is to provide a framework for further discussion. To ignore several viewpoints and only keep the ones you cherish introduces a clear bias into wikipedia. Please do not make sweeping deletions. --Dante Marx (talk) 23:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about the removal of this material, it has no sources and some of it is false, which means no sources exist for it, and that makes it original research. That's why it was removed. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 23:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We can only include material on Wikipedia that is based on reliable sources. We're not allowed to write up our own ideas and add them to articles. This is probably a redundant page because we already have articles on animal welfare and rights, but if it's to stay, it would need to contain material about animal ethics written by knowledgable, and that probably means academic, sources. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 23:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The material in question is what is taught at the animal ethics classes taught and required by the University of Michigan for all professionals involved with animal research. As it is an in-house training, I do not know how to cite it. --Dante Marx (talk) 11:35, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We can only publish what has already been published by a reliable source, Dante. Also, some of the material was incorrect, so I'd be surprised if that is exactly how it's taught. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 16:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where the information of animal protection should be placed? Which article?[edit]

Minding Animals International(MAI) " recognised that animal protection in this framework encapsulates animal liberation, animal rights, wildlife protection, animal welfare and environmentalism (in no particular order of importance)." ( MAI Objectives & Principles http://www.mindinganimals.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=92&Itemid=116)

(I've moved the new section to the bottom, which is the conventional way of arranging Talk pages, and I've removed the article-style referencing, which is not appropriate for a Talk page and only confuses the layout). Where the reference says "MAI will, principally, hold a triennial conference, but will also provide an avenue for animal studies academics to be more active in the protection of animals. It is recognised that animal protection in this framework encapsulates animal liberation, animal rights, wildlife protection, animal welfare and environmentalism (in no particular order of importance)", it is not defining any generic or established term "animal protection", it is simply a statement of the MAI objectives and principles. If the organization warranted its own article, I think that would be the place for it. But if it doesn't, then I see no need to refer to its objectives and principles at all. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Need an article of Animal Ethics, not a list of articles[edit]

There are plenty of academic resources on the topics, such as Animal Ethics Reader, Origins of Attitudes towards Animals, Encyclopedia of Animal Welfare and Animal Rights. Current structure of the topic on Wikipedia cannot catch up the development of the field. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisisaniceusername (talk • contribs) 10:53, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These are difficult articles to write, because they require specialist knowledge and access to really good sources who give a sufficient overview, and you'd want to make sure it wasn't a fork of animal welfare or animal rights. If you want to try to start one, you'd be welcome to try it on a user subpage, such as User:Thisisaniceusername/Animal ethics. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 10:58, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ball State Project[edit]

We're a group in a university classroom, and we are currently working on expanding this article. Our idea is to have a more expanded introduction, a history of events and attitudes toward animal ethics, a synopsis of different standpoints on the topic, and a synopsis of different real world practices of animal use and animal rights. Any ideas? Vmsipe (talk) 20:27, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion[edit]

We are the participants in the abovementioned educational assignment. Before we updated, all that was here was a short introduction. We expanded that intro and added everything below the navigation box. Most of our sources were academic ones, such as books from our university library. We, however, are far from experts on the topic, so we would invite more expert discussion. Someone who understands it better could organize the "Views" section more effectively. Originally we had a timeline that ended up being more about animal rights than ethics and only went back to the seventies, so we had to strike that, but we still think a section on the history of animal ethics would be a good contribution. We also invite advice on how WE can improve the article. Vmsipe (talk) 20:27, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! I just put some tags on the page, and I'll try to explain it here. About the Manual of Style, two things that quickly stood out to me are the incorrect capitalization of the section headers and the use of the wrong kind of quotation marks; there are probably other things too. My concern about essay-like is that much of the writing is more verbose than it needs to be, and sometimes verges towards original research. Please stick to what the cited source material says, and don't go beyond that. In particular, please avoid words that express an opinion in Wikipedia's voice, especially since this is a subject that attracts a lot of argument about neutral point of view. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. We are still in the process of learning how to style things for Wikipedia. Also, I think we could maintain a more neutral POV if we could find some sources that were neutral or represented the non-advocacy side. There aren't a lot of books promoting animal exploitation over animal welfare. If anyone knows of such sources, we would be interested to hear about them. Vmsipe (talk) 18:35, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. As for NPOV language, something I noticed on a cursory and superficial look is in the first sentence of the last paragraph of the "Views of human-animal relations" section, where one view is described as "the extreme opposite" of the other. That's an example of what I meant. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:09, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've undone all of the recent edits, and I want to explain that I feel that, although it's a bit harsh, it's easier for me than to parse through all the material and fix the little details, and it's entirely possible to restore the material, by reverting me, and then fixing what needs to be fixed, in which case I will have no objection at all to me being reverted – I promise! It's just that a reasonable amount of time has passed, and the concerns that I pointed out haven't really been fixed. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:41, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removed List of Subjects[edit]

Hi all. I removed the fragmentary list of ethical issues -- related mostly to horse medicine, it seems -- from the end of the article. They were topic names with no explanation, and even as a list of animal ethics topics were not representative of the field. This article could obviously use a lot of work as animal ethics is a diverse, lively, and growing field. I just don't think the segment I removed was adding anything useful to the article. Bunnyhugger (talk) 23:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

this is where you typeTeresating (talk) 18:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]