Talk:Dog Meat Festival

The name of this article

Is "Dog Meat Festival" really the common name? I mean sure, "Yulin Lychee and Dog Meat Festival" is the proper name, but even the lead calls the common name "Yulin Dog Meat Festival", and, well, "Dog Meat Festival" seems so generic, like a dictionary definition. Something must give. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:14, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

WP:PRECISION would have us favor "Yulin Lychee and Dog Meat Festival", but WP:COMMONNAME would have us favor "Yulin Dog Meat Festival". The generic "Dog meat festival" would be appropriate for an article about all such events, (if there are more than just this one) but not this article. Chrisrus (talk) 14:04, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry to be coming to this late, especially since it has been nominated for DYK, but I believe the title is completely inappropriate. I recently researched this festival in quite an amount of detail for the Dog meat article. I don't think I ever once read "Lychee and Dog Meat Festival". Many articles are confused as to whether it is Lychees which are eaten, or Lychees Wine which is drunk. In my opinion the best name would be "Yulin dog meat festival".DrChrissy ^(talk) 13:44, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't think there is a right answer on this one since the original is in Chinese. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:51, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I really think something needs to be done. I was heavily into editing the "China" sub-section of "Dog meat before I knew of the existence of this page. It simply does not show up on searches with its current name.DrChrissy ^(talk) 13:55, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, DrChrissy. Thanks for the feedback. This article is soon to be DYK. A faulty name, and (see below) a possibly fault image, maybe the DYK should be on hold or something. Thoughts? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:59, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

You seem to object in principle to this article Anna. The name is not "faulty", simply a matter of debate, and the image is fine as an example of the type of dog meat served in the region in my opinion. Is it that you find the subject "distasteful"? Philafrenzy (talk) 14:02, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

No. It's just that there are two issues that need to be resolved, especially since this will soon be DYK. We should get it right. And if the debate ends with a name change, then yes, the current name is faulty. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:09, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) ::Actually, I was also going to suggest the DYK should be temporarily retracted due to both the name and image concerns. This is not because I find it distasteful, but it just reflects badly if one week after DYK the article changes name and/or image.DrChrissy ^(talk) 14:11, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Good point. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:16, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I am not against a name change following a discussion but since there probably is no fixed name in China or no definitely correct English translation it will be a case of choosing the least wrong name. This is why the English media have been unable to settle upon a name in their reporting. Philafrenzy (talk) 14:12, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Are you sure you are getting your indentation how you want it? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:16, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

The image

This lead image doesn't really belong, at least not in the infobox. It is not a picture of the festival or even a dish from the festival.

Would we have a picture of Chicago-style ribs from Chicago as the infobox image for The Great California Rib Festival? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:20, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

And where is the source that says it is "...typical..." of what is served at the festival? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:24, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

It does belong. It is a dish from from the same region, Guangxi, where dog meat is part of the cuisine. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:48, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I find it misleading. Visitors will think this is a dish from the festival. Maybe dishes at the festival are all served in little styrofoam boxes with a watery sauce and long, yellow peppers. I have seen dog meat dishes look completely different from one another within a single city. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:54, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

How do you know it is misleading unless you have seen the dishes served at the festival? No claim is made that it is typical, just that it is a dog meat dish from the same region. It is self evident that dishes vary in appearance and I think readers will understand that. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:10, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

There is a claim that it is typical. The DYK reads: "...that according to the philosopher Julian Baggini, vegans are the only group who can oppose China's Yulin Dog Meat Festival (typical dish pictured) without any fear of hypocrisy?..." Also, the very fact that it is the lead image implies that it is or resembles a dish served at the festival. I think you have it backwards. The onus is on us to show that it is typical. We cannot say that we do not know if it misleading, so therefore it is fine. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:23, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Edwardx, Yoninah, and Cwmhiraeth: I'm pinging you because you all worked on the DYK. What do you think about the image?

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:28, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

The hook and image are now in Prep area 3 so you had better bring the matter up on the DYK discussion page if you feel strongly about it. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:35, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Cwmhiraeth. I posted here. Is that the right place? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:47, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

There is no claim in the article that it is typical and no requirement to show a typical dish. Since dishes vary a great deal what would a "typical" dish even be? The caption in the article is careful to make clear that it is a dish of the same meat from the same region. Readers know that dishes on a restaurant menu often vary according to cooking style, ingredients, presentation etc. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:37, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't think I described it as typical in the DYK. How about changing it from typical in the hook to "a dog meat dish from the same region". Philafrenzy (talk) 10:42, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Content change before DYK

Can I suggest editors read the Dog meat#China section and decide whether any of the information should be incorporated into this article prior to DYK.DrChrissy ^(talk) 14:36, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

4 October 2015‎ revert

The additions I reverted were plenty of images unrelated to the adjacent text. I also removed text about rabies and other content better suited to the dog meat article. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:52, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

User:InformativeInfoInformed: The content you are adding appears to be POV and is being reverted by others. Please discuss changes here. Many thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:53, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

China's history with dogs section

It's mostly not about even dogs as food. Should it be in the article? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:04, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

You're right, that content should not be here. That's why we have different articles! Edwardx (talk) 10:17, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

How about we remove it from here. They can always try adding it to Dog meat#China. Edwardx (talk) 10:20, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

I agree with it's removal from here - mostly irrelevant.DrChrissy ^(talk) 11:27, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I've removed it. Edwardx (talk) 12:11, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Neutrality of presentation

The wording of this statement: "The festival is celebrated annually in Yulin, Guangxi, China, during the summer solstice in June, by eating dog meat and lychees.[3] About 10,000 to 15,000 dogs are consumed during the 10 days of the festival.[3][4] Throughout the 10 days of festivities dogs are paraded in wooden crates and metal cages and are taken to be skinned and burned for consumption of festival attendants and local residents."...doesn't strike me as a particularly NPOV statement given that the same context can be applied to the section for Qurban/Sacrifice under the Islam category but the wording is less ascerbic.207.251.43.98 (talk) 19:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)Rajimus123

Violence?

Yes it's violence. They don't just eat them they torture dogs to death. Jself (talk) 00:56, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Is this about improving the article? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:01, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Pop culture Filthy Frank part

Should it be in the article? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

I am not sure. It seems very trivial to me, but it can be verified see here [1] DrChrissy ^(talk) 20:32, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

I am not sure either. There seems to be a bit of a dispute about if it should be present. That is why I posted here. I'm fine either way. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:54, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

I believe it should be included, it's how many people know that it even exists. Plus many other pages on Wikipedia include sections on when the subject is used in pop culture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CopperCrane01 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

I deleted it before as it was not cited. I've added the link to the lyrics page as a ref, so it now has a non-primary source cite as well as the YouTube primary source. And as Filthy Frank has an article, I suppose it meets our notability criteria. The song itself is desperately lame, but that's not at issue here. Edwardx (talk) 23:24, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

I have not actually listened to the song. A quick question, is "YouTuber" acccepted as a word? My 14 yr old niece uses it all the time, but should we be using it here? DrChrissy ^(talk) 23:31, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Google's dictionary says it's a word; I was pretty sure it was. I felt like I needed a word to describe who Filthy Frank is, I guess we could replace it with "entertainer" or something like that if that's more appropriate CopperCrane01 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:56, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

YouTube video

An editor has recently placed a YouTube reference in the article which shows ill treatment of dogs. I know that YouTube videos are largely frowned upon as RS, but I have also used them in the past to illustrate animal behaviours. My concern here is that we don't know what links these actions against dogs towards dogs being killed and eaten in the Festival. Comments please. WARNING There are some very shocking scenes in the video. DrChrissy ^(talk) 17:01, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Information on the conference/panel discussion the video was played at and by whom it was provided would also be particularly helpful. If Dr. A.M. Miranda could provide these details it would be most welcome. -- dsprc ^[talk] 18:16, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

I noticed that both the user page and talk page for Dr Miranda were red links. Just to make sure they know about this thread, I have left a message on their Talk page. DrChrissy ^(talk) 20:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

@White Arabian Filly: I noticed that you just reverted the recent edit giving a YouTube video. You might not have seen that I have already raised a question about this here. Perhaps you might like to contribute. DrChrissy ^(talk) 20:32, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of the discussion. I just reverted because, as you noted above, YouTube is generally a poor source. About 90% of the time I see it used, it's either a twelve-year-old claiming some celebrity did something or an ad. Feel free to revert me if you think the video is appropriate. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 22:23, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

No, I have no intention of reverting you unless the editor that posted it can give details linking it to the festival. I will possibly then raise the issue somewhere of whether we should be having such graphic videos on WP - but that is a question for another day. DrChrissy ^(talk) 22:30, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

@DrChrissy: Hi, I'm a new Wiki editor. My LinkedIn profile can be found here (Redacted) and my author bio can be found here (Redacted). I have not set-up a personal Wiki page yet. A little bit about why I'm interested in this topic: I've rescued/rehabilitated more than 20 animals since 2001 (dogs, cats, birds, etc) as a private citizen. I became involved with this movement (and found the video) after signing a petition on Change dot org do-not-proceed-with-the-yulin-dog-festival-in-2017 drafted by Jamie Schwimley. Upon viewing the video, I was horrified by the images and it shocked me into action. I sent a private message to Susan Wojcicki (3rd connection) on Linked to keep the video online despite the fact that it violates YouTube posting policy. Although I haven't received a response, the video remains on Youtube. I also got in touch with the person who posted the video, Jamie Schwimley, who also hosts the video on Jamie also told me she has additional sources she can add in May, particularly an interview with an animal rights radio talk show discussing the festival. I can add the additional references, as they become available, per Wiki guidelines. Since this is my first Wiki edit, I know I probably made lots of mistakes. I wanted to post the original website change dot org but I was not allowed. That's why I included the YouTube reference instead. I should probably add a disclaimer as well, right? What is the policy on that? Is there a preferred format for the video reference? I'm grateful for any suggestions/help. Thank you! 18:52, 11 April 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ Dr. A.M. Miranda (talk • contribs) 18:53, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Please see my inquiry above: what conference was it presented at, and which speaker presented it to the panel? Policy on content is we neither censor nor do content disclaimers; relevant bits are: WP:OM, WP:CENSOR, WP:DISC. Please also see WP:NPOV for our position regarding neutrality of content included within the encyclopaedia. -- dsprc ^[talk] 19:59, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

@Dr. A.M. Miranda: hope you don't mind but I have removed the linkedin address and bio address from your post in this thread, as it falls into the category of non-public personal information, such as phone numbers, home addresses, workplaces or identities of pseudonymous or anonymous individuals who have not made their identity public. I've done this because you indicate you're a new editor, and you might be unaware of the occasional risk that a random passerby might misuse this info to harass you.

Of course you're free to release this level of personal info if you really want to, though ideally it would be on a userpage rather than on an article talkpage. However if you do want to directly identify yourself to this extent on Wikipedia, it's worth reading the relevant section of this policy section under "Personal and privacy-breaching material " Basically, you're free to link your userpage to your LinkedIn page etc, provided you're aware of the potential downsides.

Happy to discuss further if required, and all the best with your future editing.. -- Euryalus (talk) 07:53, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

References

I came to this page after reading something online about the festival. The page echoed the claims of the online article but the claims seemed non-NPOV and said [citation needed]. I went to the talk page to see if I had viewed the pages in the midst of a wiki-war. I understand the concerns with both graphic content and YouTube as a soured, but the video with an appropriate warning would have made the page more useful and authoritative.

RE YouTube as a source: sure sometimes the material is bad, but that is also true of other sources. By its nature as a self-publishing platform, the quality on YouTube will literally span the gamut from best to worst. If someone had embedded the YouTube video on their own page, would that make it better? If so, that is silly. Rico (talk) 16:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Image

The caption clearly says the dish in the photo is from another city and has nothing to do with the festival. It should be removed. --2001:16B8:3133:3D00:8DC0:6CAF:B308:961E (talk) 17:53, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

I agree. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:30, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Image

Oh my gosh! That photo is gonna give me nightmares! It's too creepy. Probably along with other people agreeing with me. Please remove it and have no picture. Cincinnati resident (talk) 02:38, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not censor. While the image may be disturbing to some, that does not mean it is automatically removed. If it disturbs you that much, then do not visit the page. livelikemusic talk! 02:34, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

How about no pictures at all?

Cincinnati resident (talk) 19:13, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Once again, Wikipedia does not censor; removing the image is censorhsip, and again, it making you uncomfortable is not a valid reason for removal. If you don't like it, don't visit the page. livelikemusic talk! 20:13, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Why don't they show a picture of the festival in action? It's rather strange to post something designed to shock American audiences. 124.169.158.113 (talk) 03:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Image topic #789274832 (Just kidding, looks like #4)

Apparently, at one point it was a picture of a dish served at the festival. Now it is a picture of a dead dog hanging from a hook. Uhh, fair enough, but... if there's a BBQ festival in Texas, I doubt they'd show a dead cow hanging on a hook. I don't think I need to accuse anyone of POV here, because we all know why the image is there... anyway, can we get an image that isn't as emotionally charged? Probably not, but I thought I'd ask. Mercster (talk) 21:42, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

@Mercster: I agree, we shouldn't be using the current image as the main image for the article for the exact same reasons. I think it's probably preferable to leave the lead blank as pretty much any image is going to be disputed, but am open to ideas. GnocchiFan (talk) 16:04, 24 July 2023 (UTC)