Talk:Non-vegetarian food in India

what is this article about?
This article seems to be written with a propaganda against vegetarianism and doesn't suggest the meaning of non-vegetarianism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.14.130 (talk) 19:07, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

J mareeswaran (talk) 08:57, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

This article can be renamed as view of meat eating in Hindu cultural traditions? J mareeswaran (talk) 14:44, 20 January 2018 (UTC) J mareeswaran (talk) 14:44, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Definition
Hi, I'd like to avoid an edit war with you. Here is my reasoning for defining nonvegetarian as "someone who eats meat" instead of "someone who does not abstain from eating meat".
 * Cambridge dictionary uses this definition (verifiable)
 * it is much shorter (simple)
 * your definition would include all vegetarians for whom their diet is not abstinence (restraining oneself from doing or enjoying something). They exist. They do not eat meat, e.g. because they do not like the taste or for health reasons. Some people may see all vegetarianism as abstinence. But Wikipedia should be neutral.

It seems like you feel strongly about the use of the word nonvegetarian in the Indian context. But Wikipedia is no place to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS, but to present information in a neutral, simple (WP:MOS: "Since using plain English makes the encyclopedia easier and more intuitive to read, editors should avoid ambiguity, jargon, and vague or unnecessarily complex wording"), and verifiable way. ‎⠀Trimton⠀‎‎ 21:44, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for initiating a talk about this. Here's my reasoning:
 * Wikipedia defines vegetarianism as the practice of abstaining from meat. Non-vegetarian being a made-up word explicitly constructed to negate the word "vegetarian", would therefore mean non-"abstaining from meat".
 * Vegetarianism is characterized by conscious abstinence. Non-vegetarian is not a conscious inclusion of meat but rather the absence of any prejudice/aversion/reluctance towards consuming meat. A person "who consumes meat" is therefore not the correct definition of "non-vegetarian", but rather the definition of meatarian.
 * People who do not eat meat for whatever reasons are still explicitly abstaining from eating meat regardless of the reason. That is still in line with the definition of vegetarianism used in Wikipedia.

Therefore, I believe defining non-vegetarian as the practice of "not abstaining from meat" makes more sense. Remember that the word non-vegetarian is dependent entirely on the word "vegetarian" and hence must have a definition that explicitly negates the definition of "vegetarian". Nonwiktion (talk) 05:27, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, my response is as follows:
 * You cannot use Wikipedia as a source. It might be wrong. Even if it isn't, it might not be cited correctly. See WP:NOTSOURCE. In fact, the definition at Vegetarianism is not supported by the refs it cites.
 * I disagree with your definition of vegetarianism as inherently abstinent, as do the two refs cited for the definition at Vegetarianism and many more, e.g. Encyclopedia Britannica ‎⠀Trimton⠀‎‎  14:48, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Indian English
I don't see any source saying that it originated in Indian English. But even if it did, as long as it's used outside of Indian English, it can't just be called an "Indian English" term. The statement that it's an Indian English word inherently implies that it's not used outside of Indian English.
 * I disagree about your implications. Here is the source.  --Venkat TL (talk) 08:23, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That source only says that "non-veg" originated in Indian English; it doesn't say anything about the term "non-vegetarian".
 * When you say that a word is an [X language] word, it means that it's used in [X language]. Specifying a specific dialect of English implies that it's not a part of the English lexicon as a whole (otherwise you wouldn't have specified that dialect), which is untrue in this case. If you can show that it originated in Indian English, we can specify that it originated there using proper terminology, though. -- पदाति (talk) 08:46, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Disagree with your understanding. See WP:BURDEN that has been met. You are trying to censor the origin of the word without good reasons. If you have conflicting information, please feel free to bring it to this discussion along with a reliable source. Venkat TL (talk) 08:54, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Why do you disagree? I've tried to explain, you're not explaining your reason for disagreement. I'm not trying to censor the origin of the word, I already said that if you could find a good source, I'm fine with specifying where it originated. You are the one who is failing to meet WP:BURDEN. You are the one trying to "add or restore" that the phrase originated in Indian English. The very page you linked says "Any material lacking an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports[2] the material may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source." -- पदाति (talk) 09:13, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You are not an authority on this topic. It does not matter what you believe. It does not matter what you understand. What matters is what the reliable sources say. The article presents what the reliable sources say. If you want to add something, you will need to meet WP:BURDEN and present sources. Just saying I understand this is wrong so I want to remove it is not enough. In your comments above you have made several controversial assertions without giving any evidence or source to back them up. Without a reliable source backing up your assertions, I cannot even consider them. Venkat TL (talk) 09:44, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * We're not talking about "beliefs" here. You're trying to include content that is not supported by reliable sources. You don't seem to understand the meaning or implication of the statement "Non-vegetarian (non-veg) is an Indian English word", and you are furthermore trying to say that the term "non-vegetarian" originated in India, which has not been substantiated by any reliable source so far. Tell me what I've said that's "controversial", and I can back it up. As I said before, according to WP:BURDEN "Any material lacking an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source". I removed an assertion which was not backed by any reliable source, and you restored it without adding any new citations that actually support the statement. The citation that you added only states that the abbreviation "non-veg" originated in Indian English, it doesn't say anything about the term "non-vegetarian" itself. According to WP:BURDEN, I have the right to remove the suggestion that "non-vegetarian" originated in Indian English, and you need to find a source that actually substantiates it in order to add it back. I agree that the abbreviation "non-veg" originated in Indian English, so I'm fine including that in the article, if you want. -- पदाति (talk) 10:19, 25 December 2021 (UTC)


 * --Venkat TL (talk) 11:59, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You found a dictionary which lists it as both Indian English and South-East Asian English. I found one that lists it as British English. I also found one that doesn't list it as being dialect-specific.  Since the word seems to be used in so many dialects, I think that it would be better simply to not specify any dialects. If you want, I guess we could also try to add all the possible dialects the word is found in, but that seems clunkier to me. Either way, we have to be consistent. -- पदाति (talk) 13:39, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Rename this article or the edit wars will continue
This page, though named as if it is worldwide, applies to the term "non-vegetarian" in India alone.

The page started out in 2012 as a link to the Wiktionary definition of "nonvegetarian". Even today, googling for "non-vegetarian" gets you pages of dictionary definitions as search results, rather than articles.

Someone started to edit this article six years later — coincidentally the same day as the publishing in Indian online magazine DailyO of an essay on January 19, 2018 titled "'Non-vegetarian' is the biggest casteist scam that has ever been pulled on Indians" in which the author moaned "At the time of drafting this article, Wikipedia does not even have an entry for the phrase 'non-vegetarian'", accompanied by a screenshot of the then-extant June 12, 2017 version of this article from Wikipedia.

The first appearance of any citations occurred the following day and included the DailyO essay (the only original citation surviving today), then follows a series of edits from India-article-focused editors and IP editors geolocated to India, all fighting over content for the following 10 days.

On February 2, 2018, the article finally lost its Template:Wiktionary redirect. 

The article continued to gain citations and be contentious amongst editors (mostly Indian). A few months ago a non-Indian editor, perhaps not realizing this is an Indian-based essay, again took up the fight to remove the phrase "is an Indian English word" from the opening sentence. Starting here and continuing over several months, gathering a few more editors along the way, they have tried to downplay the original DailyO essay — presumably to give the article a more worldwide view and be less India-focused.

Until this article is renamed to make it clear that this article is about an Indian issue, it will continue to attract non-Indian editors (vegetarian or non-vegetarian) to try to co-opt the article for a worldwide viewpoint. Please stop the edit warring and discuss whether to rename the article (and to what) or to open it up for a worldwide viewpoint and compartmentalize the India issue under appropriate section headers.

My opinion is that this article should be renamed — and the original link to Wiktionary stub be recreated back under the title "Non-vegetarian" under the reasoning that we have an article for vegetarianism and non-vegetarianism is simply its opposite or counterpoint. (It can then grow into a worldwide-view article if that is needed.)

Platonk (talk) 19:05, 25 December 2021 (UTC)


 * To answer your query, read this thread (above). Platonk (talk) 07:37, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Edits to the lead
Padati, You have been reverted once. Stop edit warring. Discuss your edits on the talk page. Venkat TL (talk) 06:28, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * This is not something about which there needs to be a discussion. Stop reverting a minor grammatical correction. पदाति (talk) 06:36, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I disagree to both. Venkat TL (talk) 06:38, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The parenthetical phrase modifies "non-vegetarian", not "food", so it should go after the term "non-vegetarian". "I disagree" is not a response that furthers discussion. --पदाति (talk) 06:48, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * What is this article about? Venkat TL (talk) 06:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The term "non-vegetarian", which is sometime shortened to "non-veg" in Indian English. "Non-vegetarian food" isn't shortened to "non-veg", it's shortened to "non-veg food". --पदाति (talk) 07:15, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I did not ask the title of the article. I can see the title is Non vegetarian. I asked what is this article about. Or in Wikipedia terminology, what is the WP:SHORTDESCRIPTION for this article. Venkat TL (talk) 07:18, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think this article has a WP:SHORTDESCRIPTION right now. The article isn't about "Non-vegetarian food", if that's what you're suggesting; it's about non-vegetarianism in general. Actually, the lead sentence should probably be updated to reflect that. That doesn't change the fact that my correction was grammatical. It's not a debate, it's a matter of basic grammatical correctness. It has nothing to do with what the article is about. --पदाति (talk) 07:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * It is about Non Veg food. And here lies our disagreement. Please provide reliable sources to support your claim. All the refs support the position that the article is about the food. Please do not re add the content without consensus. Venkat TL (talk) 07:02, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * You have to understand that the phrase "Non-vegetarian food (in Indian English sometimes shortened to non-veg[1])" is incorrect because the parentheses are next to the wrong thing. Even if you believe the article is about non-vegetarian food specifically it doesn't change that fact that the grammatical correction is necessary. The correction has nothing to do with what the article may or may not be about. I don't know how many times I need to repeat this point. By the way, if you continue to insist that the article pertains only to non-vegetarian food, then we should move the page and remove all references to anything else. --पदाति (talk) 08:49, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * And I am telling you that article as it stands is fine and there is nothing wrong with it. Your edits are not grammatical fix and non constructive. The biggest concern here is that your edits are not supported by any reliable source. Venkat TL (talk) 15:08, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Non veg is often used as an abbreviation for Non Vegetarian Food. "Non veg food" is also used by "Non veg" is more commonly used. The lead has been written accordingly. your edits are disrupting this. Venkat TL (talk) 12:14, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
 * From the sources used in the article, and a Google search, it seems like 'non-veg' is more often used as an abbreviation of non-vegetarian, rather than non-vegetarian food. The scientific article cited, also uses it like this. As such, I would go for:
 * Non-vegetarian food (in Indian English sometimes shortened to non-veg food )
 * So compared to the current lede, the word food is unbolded twice. Femke (talk) 20:53, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @Femkemilene thank you for your valuable comments. Venkat TL (talk) 08:07, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Some points
Greetings,

Though I came from 3rd opinion request board but I would not be touching that since English language grammar and Manual of style for Wikipedia articles are not my forte.

I am leaving a note here because I was not clear about certain things about the article.


 * For universal topic Meat exists, various dishes related articles seem to exist for general meat related cuisines. Articles Veganism deals with universal secular Vegetarianism and the article  Vegetarianism and religion caters mainly to Indic descent vegetarianism and I guess these 2 pages would cover even debates surrounding Vegetarianism  Vs Non Vegetarian.
 * So scope and content for this article seem to be limited to "Non-vegetarian food, cuisine and related culture in India" Then why does article title intends to confuse reader whether it is meant to be a universal article or India specific article. If it is India specific article then have a clear article title for the same giving better idea of the scope.
 * I will suggest scope and short description for the article as "Non-vegetarian food, cuisine and related culture in India"

Thanks

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Since already you seem to have gone through the article at least a little, I would request your at least preliminary input what will be more suitable article title for this article or let that be as is? &#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 06:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I think given the word is Indian-English specific and has a different meaning in Indian English than in British/(US?) English (the inclusion of eggs), I'd say this should be focussed on the Indian definition and culture surrounding it.
 * About the short description: those should be limited to 40 characters. if we take out the word related (implied), and cuisine, it should be fine.
 * Not quite sure what you had in mind for an alternative title? Femke (talk) 07:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Veg and Non Veg debate
If at all article wants capture Veg and Non Veg debate too then let that be more nuanced coverage,  for example, to my knowledge in India many regularly non vegetarian people too compromise with non vegetarian and follow vegetarian for certain days weeks or months as part of religious obligation etc. Some of such people seem to have special Non vegetarian days  before starting Vegetarian weeks and after completion of Vegetarian weeks. And these people might follow as pure vegetarianism as those people follow pure vegetarianism through out the life.

Present sourcing from Daily opinion describes all vegetarian as 'poor choices' but where one would put those people who are vegetarian on certain days.

Secondly restaurant name plate describing 'pure veg' are their to attract people who are on 'pure veg' diet. In my studies I have not come across any Indian law or social practice that makes mandatory on Non Vegetarian restaurants to declare so through their name plates so. Non vegeterian restaurants may be declaring on name boards so since they might wish to attract non vegetarian customers. Nothing wrong in criticism even strong one but let that be more nuanced and from balanced credible sources like journals books etc. not just sources interested in criticism of criticism sake.

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 10:43, 18 February 2022 (UTC)


 * @Bookku Thank you for reviewing the dispute between Padati and me, and giving your opinion. The detailed reply is very helpful. I will use it to improve the article. Venkat TL (talk) 12:10, 18 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Is it okay if I add a section on 'Non– vegetarian culture' ?
 * Here are three articles Diet in Hinduism, Buddhist vegetarianism, Jain vegetarianism if any one wants to link while criticizing, or See also Manual of Style allows for them.
 * I suppose Template:Diets can be added at bottom and if you are going to cover cushions part then you can think over adding Template:Cuisines
 * &#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 13:31, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I doubt there is anything called "Non Veg Culture". Content should be sourced to reliable media. What are the sources for adding that section? Just to be clear, Indians use the term Vegetarian for Non-meat eaters. People who are called Non Vegetarians eat both meat and non-meat diets. The strange nomenclature is based on Caste supremacy. The Last Caveman had explained it in brief and clearly. Venkat TL (talk) 13:39, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
 * While referring to culture (the debate is not in my mind) I am referring to cuisine related culture. If only recipe is taken into account it gets limited to dishes but if we take into account hunting, ritual sacrificing offerings feast etc all then gets related to culture. Many Indian tribes do have ritual sacrificing offerings feast imbibed as part of their culture.
 * Similarly sacrificing offerings feast etc happens in the name of some deities too. Even among Brahmans some castes and some Brahmans in some regions do not consider fish as non vegetarian. Indian culture has issues as you stated but things are not always black and white, there seem to be some grey shades present.
 * Just added Bibliography of Saraswati, Baidyanath, et al. on  Page 35 it informs offerings in aprox 6 % temples are 'Non vegetarian' (details related to region will need to be checked further from the book) and the book also reminds about Shakta Brahmans castes who are 'non vegetarians'
 * Just added Bibliography of Saraswati, Baidyanath, et al. on  Page 35 it informs offerings in aprox 6 % temples are 'Non vegetarian' (details related to region will need to be checked further from the book) and the book also reminds about Shakta Brahmans castes who are 'non vegetarians'


 * &#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 14:14, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, agree. We may need to use a more appropriate section heading, but that is a discussion for a later time. I am fine with this article including these contents that you have suggested. Venkat TL (talk) 14:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

A suggestion
Greetings @ Venkat TL,

IDK MoS about using Indic language synonyms for term the 'Non-vegetarian' in the article. But what I suggest is to have a list of Indic synonyms at least here on the talk page which will help searching and cross checking various RS vis a vis Indic languages whenever required in future.

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 17:39, 4 March 2022 (UTC)


 * From Google translator pl feel free to improve where necessary.
 * Tamil அசைவம் Acaivam
 * Malayalam ?
 * Telugu మాంసాహారం Mānsāhāraṁ
 * Kannada ಮಾಂಸಾಹಾರಿ Mānsāhāraṁ
 * Odia ?
 * Marathi मांसाहारी Mānsāhārī
 * Bangla মাংসাশি Mānsāśi
 * Assamese ?
 * Hindi मांसाहारी maansaahaaree
 * Urdu ?
 * Punjabi ਮਾਸਾਹਾਰੀ Māsāhārī
 * Gujrati માંસાહારી Māsāhārī
 * Sindhi ?

Non-vegetarian, Requesting inputs @ WP:DUE
An input request about 'Indian Non-vegetarian food culture' @ WP:DUE &#32;Bookku   (talk) 07:58, 14 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Archived discussion link @ Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard/Archive 101
 * &#32;Bookku   (talk) 12:48, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Kautilya3 Your intervention (and subsequently F&F) had changed course of WP:DUE discussion. With F&F views other users in that discussion seem to put up with the article; but your position is still not clear, whether you still want to push for merger or delete? Where does the fate of this article stands now?
 * I prefer a clear community consensus on existence of the article and it's area of topic coverage. Clearer community position will help contributors understand where to spend time.   &#32;Bookku    (talk) 13:21, 13 December 2022 (UTC)


 * , I think the response at the NPOV board etc was clear, and I think agree with them. The topic is too broad/unfuzzy/unclear. Non-vegetarian is a dictionary term, and it's various connotations (including unusual ones like "non-veg jokes") are better noted in a dictionary. Most of its encyclopaedic potential is already covered in Diet in Hinduism and other related articles. The part about the mandatory red/green markings and regulation etc is interesting and novel, but probably also belongs somewhere else. The article should be soft-redirected to the Wiktionary entry. I'll do so if you or anyone else doesn't disagree, or it can go for a merge/deletion discussion if broader discussion is yet needed. regards, TryKid&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 15:07, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Notability concerns

 * Thanks for your insight. Users like F&F seem to have a different opinion and other users a different one. I do appreciate concerns of both sides. I do not wish to be judged for mis–judging of community consensus. Article is here for 10 years with 190 plus daily views, while that does not confer notability, seeking more views can be better idea, hence I have placed Notability tag on the article. Let us wait for more inputs to pour in. &#32;Bookku    (talk) 04:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I boldly moved the page to "Non-vegetarian food in India", because that is the topic that is actually covered on the page. It can remain and be improved as much as possible. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Vegetarianism in Indian context
Please note in Indian context vegetarians are Lactarians and vegetarianism refers strictly to Lacto vegetarianism J mareeswaran (talk) 18:05, 16 November 2022 (UTC)