Template:Did you know nominations/Black veganism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:27, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Black veganism

Created by Valereee (talk). Self-nominated at 23:12, 14 June 2021 (UTC).

  • ALT1: ... that Blacks are the fastest-growing demographic of vegans in the United States, with twice as many identifying as vegan as compared to the general population? Same source, "The fastest-growing vegan demographic is African Americans."
  • Comment: Apologies if this is nit-picky, but my understanding is that "African Americans" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as "Black people in the United States". It might be good to ensure that the wording reflects the sources in that sense, both in the hooks and the article. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 20:01, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
ezlev, not at all. The sources in this article seem to use them interchangeably. Blacks is a bigger group than African-Americans, and since Black includes (for example) many people from Jamaica (which AA doesn't always), I think Black is probably correct here? Open to other arguments. —valereee (talk) 20:23, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
I think you're right that Black is probably the correct/ideal term to use here, I just worry that it might not align with the meaning of the sources – for example, the Pew Research Center survey referenced in the source for ALT0 may really have been discussing African Americans in the sense of "Black American citizens" or something else that's semantically different from "Black people in the United States". That's why I'm not sure of the best course of action here. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 20:29, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Ezlev, sorry, how is Black Americans different from Black people in the US? —valereee (talk) 22:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
It's different because one can be in the US without being American. Again, nitpicky, and unfortunately the ambiguity lies in the sources themselves, which is why I suggested that it might be good to just use the same terminology they do although it's probably fine either way. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 22:28, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
So you're concerned the researchers were talking to a significant number of Blacks who were at the time in the US but weren't actually American citizens? —valereee (talk) 22:47, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
I wouldn't go so far as "concerned"... I was scrolling through the noms, saw what looked like a possible source–content inconsistency, figured I would point it out. Now that I've done that, I don't feel a need to keep discussing it unless you'd like to. You're probably right that the discrepancy wouldn't be significant. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 23:05, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
  • New enough and long enough. QPQ present. Has all the citations it needs, including on the hook fact (though I find the last paragraph in "History" has two redundant sentences back to back, Valereee). The article content looks fine; there are a couple more redlinks than I'd normally see in a new DYK, but I suspect some of the topics might be notable if they have the sourcing (maybe not SupaNova Slom though). This is a great piece in terms of countering systemic bias, too. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 08:19, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the review, Sammi Brie! I've fixed that sentence! —valereee (talk) 10:20, 9 July 2021 (UTC)