Talk:Timeline of animal welfare and rights

I'm curious to why there has been no mentions here about the animal protection laws and movements in pre-WW2 Germany. They were quite radical in the area compared to most other nations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_welfare_in_Nazi_Germany#Measures — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.50.88.50 (talk) 12:09, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Add to this timeline - Leslie Cross
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_animal_welfare_and_rights#cite_note-renier-35

Leslie Cross - Although the first Vegan Society was formed by Donald Watson and 5 members in 1944, it was not until 1949 that Leslie J. Cross pointed out that the society lacked an official definition. He then suggested: “the principle of the emancipation of animals from exploitation by man”. This was later clarified to “seek an end to the use of animals by man for food, commodities, work, hunting, vivisection, and by all other uses involving exploitation of animal life by man”. The definition was again changed in 1979. He was the first to define veganism and equate it with animal rights.

https://thevegantruth.blogspot.com/2017/08/my-vegan-hero.html

I read articles verifying this to be true and his niece responded to the above blog post and verified his existence.

Flags
Is the use of flags on this timeline appropriate? If so, is the current use of flags appropriate? Some modern national flags are attached to events that happened centures ago, long before the rise of modern nation-states, e.g. the 1958 flag of the Syrian Arab Republic is invoked to represent Al-Ma'arri, who lived around the year 1000 in the Emirate of Aleppo; there was no 'Syrian' state until the 20th century, certainly not one with that flag. Similarly, the 3rd-century BCE monarch Ashoka of the Maurya Empire is framed as an 'Indian' with the 1947 flag of the Republic of India. Both these examples are obviously anachronistic. Meanwhile, however, the 1935–1945 Nazi flag with a big swastika is invoked when mentioning the 1933 German law. Why? Why doesn't that get the modern German black-red-yellow flag? This may be historically correct, but is obviously inconsistent with the anachronistic examples. So either we
 * 1) Use only all current flags and apply them purely based on current political geography (anachronistic)
 * 2) Use the flags used at the time of the event (historically correct) – if said territory had official flags at the time at all
 * 3) Don't use flags at all (avoids any issues)

Moreover, there are arguably 'international' events which cannot be accurately represented by a single flag. For example, the fact that the International Whaling Commission put a moratorium on all whaling (except for aboriginal subsistence) in 1982 is arguably a global/international achievement which is not dependent on any particular country or (con)federation of countries (such as the EU or Council of Europe, which might merit the European flag); the IWC is not even part of the United Nations. So I've taken the liberty of taking a photograph of the Earth from space as a representation of the scope of this event, which cannot be monopolised by any flag or state (I've done that elsewhere in lists of organisations that operate worldwide). I've done the same for the 2013 presentation and testing of the first cultured hamburger, which may be jointly associated with the Netherlands, Austria, Russia and the United Kingdom, and perhaps even more countries; it wouldn't be appropriate for a single country to sort of 'claim credit' for an international collaborative effort. This is ultimately mostly an argument for option #3 to not use any flags at all. I'm interested to hear your thoughts. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think its okay as it. You're right its not consistent, but I find a visual picture of 'where' is helpful whilst scanning down. Trying to use the flags of ancient societies is obviously not helpful, so I would say use current flags of the territory. But some exceptions are useful, particularly if the policy was strongly associated with the flag, as in the case with the Nazis, who had unusually strong animal welfare legislation for the time in a way that is liked to Nazi ideology, and the flag is recognisable. Had, say the Soviet Union introduced notable animal welfare legislation, or ISIS, *because* of their ideologies, it would be better to use their flags rather than that of say Russia or Syria. But if consistency is everything, then I'd say use current flags. The flag It is telling us where, rather than under what regime. Thoughts? LastDodo (talk) 14:11, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Past tense
Per MOS:TENSE ('Generally, do not use past tense except for past events') and for consistency's sake, we should use present or past tense throughout the list, because we are describing events that have already happened in the past. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Should cultured meat be included in the timeline?
While it is a related topic, such developments aren't explicitly to do with animal welfare or rights. Also, there is already: Timeline of cellular agriculture Throughthemind (talk) 12:55, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That is a point of view, but I don't agree. I think that a topical treatment of animal welfare by technological replacement is indeed a key materialist interpretation of the topic, rather than the idealist interpretations that we often encounter.  Marxists concerned with animal welfare have a different approach to the shifting fortunes in the complexity, which deserve sufficient study before they or their parallels are discarded as moot.  When there is a market for oxen or horses to pull agricultural equipment, those animals are oppressed because they are exploited for their 'characteristics'; when technological innovation replaces them, they might be killed off as economically useless, but they are no longer exploited (or considered useful) in those relationships of use.  Now, I will return to the position of my undergraduate Faculty advisor who also chaired the department was considered 'venerable' in the college: he believed in 'multilinear historical evolution' because no unilinear approach to progress, regress, development, or any subsidiary topic can make sense because different historical experiences were found simultaneously or concurrently around the planet - until the modernity.  If religious conversions or food innovations or the development of digital photography (replacing the use in film making of gelatin from slaughterhouses, one form of oppression after another is being abolished. MaynardClark (talk) 05:55, 6 December 2021 (UTC)