Talk:Richard Twine (sociologist)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 21:37, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Richard Twine's 2010 Animals as Biotechnology was "the first book fully dedicated to" the discipline of critical animal studies? Source: "Richard Twine, a highly significant foundational CAS scholar who helped develop ICAS Europe and authored the first book fully dedicated to CAS, Animais as Biotechnology: Ethics, Sustainability and Critical Animal Studies, writes, 'CAS scholars stress ethical veganism and may work with those civil society groups or individuals who campaign against animal exploitation' (p. 8)." On page xxviii of this paper.
• ALT1: ...that Animals as Biotechnology, a 2010 monograph by the sociologist Richard Twine, was "the first book fully dedicated to" the discipline of critical animal studies? Source as above.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Lautaro (volcano)

Created by J Milburn (talk). Self-nominated at 08:34, 2 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Richard Twine (sociologist); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Not a review, but a comment: the quote in both hooks is so awkward with its ending in a "to" that you may as well drop the quotation marks and make the hooks paraphrases. Dahn (talk) 06:12, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks Dahn; I can do that. Josh Milburn (talk) 14:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

• ALT2 ... that Richard Twine's 2010 Animals as Biotechnology was the first scholarly book primarily focused on the discipline of critical animal studies? Source as above.
• ALT3: ...that Animals as Biotechnology, a 2010 monograph by the sociologist Richard Twine, was the first scholarly book primarily focused on the discipline of critical animal studies? Source as above.
  • Another not-full-review, but: "first" hooks are very often problematic, because sources that call something the first are often mistaken or because the thing they are first for can be very narrowly defined. See past discussion at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 160#The first", "the only", "the youngest", "the oldest", Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 177#"First person to do X" hooks, and especially Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 186#"First" hooks. This nomination seems no exception. Anthony Nocella, one of the founders of critical animal studies, published at least two books on related topics prior to this one: Terrorists Or Freedom Fighters?: Reflections on the Liberation of Animals (2004) and Igniting a Revolution: Voices in Defense of the Earth (2006). One could argue that perhaps these were not "focused on the discipline" in the same way as the hook subject, but that seems to be splitting hairs. Can we maybe find a different focus for the hooks? —David Eppstein (talk) 06:13, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
    • @David Eppstein: Thank you; excellent feedback. Leave it with me. Josh Milburn (talk) 11:55, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
      • @David Eppstein: I've added something about his most cited paper, and so now propose the below:

• • ALT4: ...that the sociologist Richard Twine, drawing on the work of Sara Ahmed, conceptualizes the "vegan killjoy", who challenges anthropocentrism by their mere presence? From p. 28 of this paper: "Richard Twine (2014) uses Sara Ahmed’s work on the figure of the feminist killjoy and convincingly argues that there are sufficient resonances with veganism to warrant coining and critiquing the construction of the “vegan killjoy”. He explains that, within a “normatively omnivorous meat culture” (628), the concept of the vegan killjoy encapsulates how “[v]eganism constitutes a direct challenge to the dominant affective community that celebrates the pleasure of consuming animals” (Twine 2014, 628). The pleasure and happiness emanating from the shared consumption of food that the vegan killjoy “spoils” can only function if animals have already firmly been relegated to killable commodities whose lives and suffering do not matter. It is thus a fundamentally anthropocentric understanding of pleasure and happiness and, according to Twine (2014), the vegan killjoy, by her very presence (or, in the case of Kate, the memory or anticipation of her presence), exposes and disrupts this anthropocentrism. Twine (2014, 638) rehabilitates the figure of the vegan killjoy and claims the “decentring of joy and happiness [as] critical deconstructive work”."

• Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Long enough, new enough. ALT4 cited, very interesting, and technically short enough, though I'd expect a more merciless prepbuilder to truncate it at "killjoy". No neutrality issues found, no maintenance templates found, no valid copyright concerns. QPQ done. Good to go.--Launchballer 23:55, 26 January 2024 (UTC)