Talk:That Vegan Teacher

Semi-protected edit request on 3 March 2021

She was born on September 24, 1964. 2601:589:4900:F750:874:7EF3:BBE0:FF55 (talk) 14:41, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Source? 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 15:23, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Linguist111^talk 15:30, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

That vegan teacher has another tik tok account, in which she breaches tik tok's guidelines by ban evading. Jesse Onyeka (talk) 00:50, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

If you can find a reliable source for this claim, we'll add it in. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 04:13, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Don’t delete

I wouldn’t exactly delete this article, but rather move it into a draft so that it can continue to be edited for more reliable sources. 2600:1002:B106:6335:AD77:3F41:98AD:363F (talk) 16:46, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2021

The controversy section should be updated to include her most recent controversy, the "Are You Racist?" video on her YouTube channel where she made an acronym out of the n-word to refer to a black baby doll and wrote "ban cruelty, not words" at the bottom. BubblTee123 (talk) 22:17, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Linguist111^talk 01:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 March 2021

"permanently" under the screenshot of the banned TikTok page is misspelled as "permanentley" DpMusicman (talk) 16:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done EN-Jungwon 16:19, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

We have yet to verify

Hi there! I'm going to ping @KullyKeemaKa:, but this is a note to everyone in particular:

So, i see that someone claimed to be That Vegan Teacher on the deletion discussion page– really weird for me, imma be honest. But we haven't verified this user's identity and should not be making any biographical edits unless we can back this up with primary sources, particularly from her website. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 17:31, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

racist and homophobic

It seems very WP:WEASEL to write "Diekmeyer's content was sometimes characterized as racist and homophobic", since this is a WP:BLP we need to do better here. This should be much more clear: who called her comments what. Otherwise this needs to be removed. Looking at the four sources, I could only find references to an online petition and a reference to another youtuber actually classifying her comments. Just for comparison, I looked at articles of William John Beattie, Wolfgang Droege (some actual Nazis) and it seems strange that the language in this article is more strong and the characterization of actual Nazis/white supremacist. --hroest 18:25, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

@Hannes Röst: we can inline attribute to The Daily Dot.theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 19:39, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Also, in terms of the tone on each, I think that says more about how Neo-Nazi isn't a buzzword when it's self proclaimed, as opposed to racism being a hot topic right now and much more of a buzzword when it's just an allegation. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 23:00, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

I think we could spell out "Rachel Kiley at the Daily Dot" for attribution; honestly I dont know how relevant the Daily Dot is. Clearly having a random youtuber D'Angelo Wallace calling her racist is probably not something that we should record here. We want to write an Encyclopedia and not become the official record of which "content creator" called which other "content creator" a bad word. The accusation coming from the Daily Dot seems to be more relevant and a better source, as they seem to be a legitimate media outlet even though the journalists article history looks more like she is writing a column than real journalism. My main concern is the impact this could have on a person in real life if we record these accusations here and we should be *extra* careful here due to WP:BLP, on the other hand this is what the subject is mainly known for and she seems to be a somewhat public figure by now. --hroest 01:11, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

theleekycauldron I have changed this now to "Rachel Kiley at the Daily Dot has characterized some of Diekmeyer's content as racist and homophobic" since I could not find any other sources that specifically support this statement. I hope you are ok with that? I also changed to "some of" her content since the characterization only describes a subset of her content as racist/homophobic, not all of it. Furthermore, since this seems to be a case where a subject does not agree with this characterization, I think a statement needs to be added to reflect this? See for example Donald_Trump#Racial_views on how to handle such a situation. --hroest 15:19, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

theleekycauldron, Diekmeyer was recently accused of spelling the racist N-word with a Miss Elaina doll next to it. She has been in a lot of controversy for this, and PBS Kids was made aware of this. I don't think we should add it to the article just yet, though. KullyKeemaKa (talk) 23:46, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Scratch that, it's already on the article, I just don't think we should add to it or edit it yet. KullyKeemaKa (talk) 00:19, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@KullyKeemaKa: Why not? As long as we follow WP:RS, WP:NPOV, and WP:BLP, I see no reason to exclude content, especially on the basis of due weight. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 00:40, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@Hannes Röst: That works fine :) I don't WP:OWN this page. Also, yeah adding her response would be a good idea. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 18:31, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea, but I guess that response would be in her videos or here, but unattributed which I am currently not willing or interested to watch. Her response in the AfD discussion at least clearly indicates her position that she would dispute the claims of being racist/homophobic. --hroest 19:17, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

I think it's important to remember that we can't verify that that was actually That Vegan Teacher. Otherwise, yeah i don't want to watch that video. I will if you don't want to, though. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 21:20, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

N-Word

Pinging @KullyKeemaKa and Hannes Röst: WP:Offensive material pretty clearly spells out we can't just use "n-word". I haven't seen the original video, so if someone wants to describe exactly how it was used, we probably have to correct the record. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 00:49, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

I think "mentioning" the word is not quite the way to go about it since this could mean a ton of different things, if you search Wikipedia for the word it is almost always a complete quote to make sure people are not cited out of context. --hroest 01:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@Hannes Röst: Absolutely, it's worth expanding on. But we shouldn't leave it as a mince, right? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 01:18, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree, policy is to use the actual word and not censor anything. See Wikipedia:Offensive material. --hroest 01:23, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Just saw this, understood. KullyKeemaKa (talk) 20:51, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Unreliable sources

This article (permalink) is dependent on a number of unreliable sources:

• Cite note 1 [1] – This Medium article is clearly unsuitable for Wikipedia because it is user-generated content. The author of the Medium article, "Celebrityegy", is not reputable.
• Cite note 2 [2] – This Biography Daily article is unreliable because the website lacks professional editorial oversight. If you look at their About Us page, their feedback and complaints email address is a gmail address, which is a red flag that this is an amateur operation rather than a serious journalism organization.
• Cite note 13 [3] – Per WP:BI, there is generally no consensus on the reliability of Business Insider, but for biographical information about a living person, I think we should try to find higher quality sources.

I will be editing the article shortly to remove information dependent on these sources. Per WP:BLP, please do not restore the content without providing a more reliable source. Mz7 (talk) 18:54, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

What did you see?

why did you revert all your edits? How do you know her name is Karen Elizabeth? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 06:14, 18 March 2021 (UTC) @Clear Looking Glass:

@Clear Looking Glass: Seconding this. I think you make a good point that cited source refers to the subject as "Kadie Karen Diekmeyer" and not "Kadie Elizabeth Diekmeyer" [4]. Looking back, I'm not sure where "Kadie Elizabeth Diekmeyer" even came from. I've edited the article to reflect this. Mz7 (talk) 22:04, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mz7: I can confirm that Diekmeyer's personal information was leaked, including her real full name. Although doxxing is normally a form of harassment, the information contained within doxxes is typically accurate. Diekmeyer goes by Kadie to prevent her from being found by Canadian authorities after breaking several Canadian hate speech laws, and this is why very few sources know her real full name. KullyKeemaKa (talk) 00:56, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Any reliable sources to confirm? we can't use doxxed information, that seems to close to WP:OR since anyone can upload stuff there. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 02:35, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Why Is this Even A Wikipedia Page?

There is no reason for this person to have a Wikipedia page, she is not person of interest and the page is very poorly sourced. Also, this page seems to be nothing more than a means to promote her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.14.187 (talk) 02:40, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Agreed, they should take it off. 98.97.33.196 (talk) 09:13, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 March 2021: Remove links to her social media

Remove the links to her YouTube channel and other social media pages. I support there being a public record of what she has done, but let's not direct people at her pages to give her views and promote her in the algorithms. 216.49.149.172 (talk) 03:20, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Our interest here is as an information resource, if readers want access to that material they are allowed to pursue it no matter how controversial it is. See: WP:CENSOR. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 03:24, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Coffee She shouldn’t have a Wikipedia page to begin with... since when did Wikipedia start doing pages on people who are on social media? She meets none of the criteria of Wikipedia to begin with as she has no significant impact on history, she’s not a celebrity or any actual famous person. Just some random person on the internet that rubbed people the wrong way and got banned on a social media platform. If you ask me this whole page is meant to do nothing but promote a controversial person that people are trying to get taken off the internet before she causes real harm and thanks to this stupid article, Wikipedia has now made a social media person a person of interest... good job... Wikipedia is now becoming a garbage gossip site instead of an online encyclopedia...

@216.49.149.172: Here are our standards for inclusion of an article in Wikipedia. If you have a registered account, you are free to nominate this article for deletion with specific policy-based reasons as to why this article should not be on Wikipedia. I will tell you, however, that a discussion already took place, and the general consensus was that this article meets the barriers to be included. Beyond that, whether or not we promote her ideology is not of our concern, as long as we present her in accordance of our policies for living people and due weight. We don't present all ideologies as equal, and we do make sure to not give false legitimacy, but if someone decides anyway to follow her, that's not our problem. The whole point of Wikipedia is that we can't make people "persons of interest"– we can only write articles about people if they have notoriety according to the inclusion guidelines above. Impact on history is not our barrier. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 04:05, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

@68.39.14.187: my mistake, pinged the wrong IP. You can answer here. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 04:08, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

theleekycauldron not buying any of it. There is no reason to include this person on Wikipedia. This “article” was created based on your clear EXCUSES for the sole purpose of promoting That Vegan Teacher. She is not a celebrity nor is she a person of interest so she does not need a Wikipedia page just cause she got banned off TikTok. And honestly that’s all your doing is making EXCUSES for promoting her cause why else would you post about a person who isn’t a celebrity or person of interest? She’s a damn TikToker. Not every person who is isn’t famous who uses TikTok isn’t on Wikipedia, except her. Why this specific insignificant person? To you leekcauldron all I got to say is save it. Your just making excuses. It’s clear you intended to promote this person...

theleekycauldron I got banned off TikTok, you gonna do an article on me? Hmm? See? Nothing but BS. Thanks for making That Vegan Teacher a person of interest and making it harder to get her off the internet. You should be ashamed of yourself...

theleekycauldron Your argument is weak. That Vegan Teacher is not a notable person cause she made headlines for making controversial videos that led to her being banned on TikTok. Also, That Vegan Teacher has not ever posted the site you claim is her official site, it’s not linked on any of her social media accounts and you can’t find it via google searching, how did you get it? VERY SUSPICIOUS!!! 🤔

@68.39.14.187: This “article” was created based on your clear EXCUSES for the sole purpose of promoting That Vegan Teacher. Let's just be clear here– my personal opinion of That Vegan Teacher is that she is a liar, a racist, a homophobe, and as a member of the LGBTQ community, her comments have deeply hurt me and others. That's irrelevant here– I'm not at liberty to editorialize. I can only relay what reliable sources have said about her.

And to be clear, this is not a place where we discuss the subject of the article. My opinion is rather irrelevant. If you believe that this article is biased towards the subject unfairly, you are more than welcome to file an edit request, or just nominate the article for deletion if you think it should be removed altogether. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 07:21, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

She is not a celebrity nor is she a person of interest so she does not need a Wikipedia page just cause she got banned off TikTok. According to our guidelines for notability, the barrier for inclusion into wikipedia is not being a celebrity, or person of interest– if a person has received significant, in-depth coverage from multiple reliable sources, it passes our criteria for inclusion into Wikipedia.

I got banned off TikTok, you gonna do an article on me? If you can point me to articles from The Daily Dot, Insider Inc., and Fox News detailing who you are, what you stand for, why you got banned, your impact on social media, and the reaction you've inspired, let me know– I will personally write your article.

That Vegan Teacher is not a notable person cause she made headlines for making controversial videos that led to her being banned on TikTok. We had a discussion about this very topic a few days ago– we would have welcomed your input. However, the consensus was that inspiring controversy repeatedly, with reliable sources covering the controversy, does make her notable, per our inclusion guidelines. She's made the headlines on multiple separate occasions, and clearly passes our guidelines for inclusion. If you disagree, please nominate this article for deletion.

Also, That Vegan Teacher has not ever posted the site you claim is her official site, it’s not linked on any of her social media accounts and you can’t find it via google searching, how did you get it? I'm not 100% whether I added that website, or someone else did– feel free to check WikiBlame (I don't own this page). If I did, I'll take full responsibility. If you think that website should be removed, you're more than welcome to file a semi-protected edit request. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 07:17, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Another thread about sources

What are our thoughts on the reliability of Plant Based News and HITC as sources for this BLP? WP:BLP requires that we use only the highest quality sources for our articles, and I have never heard of either source before. In my view, there is insufficient data on the quality of these sources' journalism and editorial oversight for us to include information from them in this article. Given the contentious nature of the subject, I think there is a high risk of WP:BLPGOSSIP happening, so we should be especially careful about which specific sources we are using to justify including information in the article. Mz7 (talk) 05:07, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

To add to this, the article also cites Newsweek, which per WP:RSP is not considered a reliable source post-2013, as well as Insider, for which there is no consensus on its reliability per WP:BI. Overall, the sourcing in this article is quite suboptimal for a biography of a living person, and for that reason I have to sympathize with some of the IPs above who question whether the previous AfD discussion correctly decided that this subject actually passes WP:GNG. Mz7 (talk) 05:13, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mz7: I agree that the sources you mentioned above aren't reliable and should be removed, with the exception of Insider, that needs further debate. But even without those, between The Daily Dot, which is RSP-greenlit, 7news.com.au, and Fox (also WP:RSP-greenlit), this article passes WP:GNG regardless, in my opinion. The stories about Gordon Ramsey and organ donations aren't really covered well enough to add without becoming WP:BLPGOSSIP. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 05:27, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Theleekycauldron, fair enough. At some point tomorrow I'll probably edit this article to address the sourcing issues. Mz7 (talk) 07:02, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mz7: sounds good. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 07:05, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Holocaust

We should probably link to Animal rights and the Holocaust which discusses the argument in detail, to highlight that she did not come up with the argument herself and put her comments into context. --hroest 16:52, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

That is a lie she planned everything she says and do 2A02:C7C:D83F:D200:D0BE:6D47:A471:B2B6 (talk) 14:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 May 2021

ImJustNicole (talk) 22:11, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

That vegan teacher is a Youtuber and ticktocker who talks about why you should be vegan. She is known to say offensive things about nonvegan people and she randomly duets people on ticktock and tells them to be vegan, in sometimes offensive ways. She is popular for making vegans look bad and most people disagree with what she says.

 Not done: Please specify what change you want to make in a "Please change X to Y" format. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 22:14, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2021

This is just a suggested request as there is no way to actually verify that thatveganteacher is actually a real-life teacher and that claim is unsourced and just cause thatveganteacher claims she is a teacher she could be just making that up like she did with her claims that she was a nurse. So I suggested removing any references that she has an actual occupation as a teacher until it can be proven through reliable sources that she is one.

 Done fair enough. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 22:38, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: Wait, I found something. L33tm4n (talk) 17:51, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

@L33tm4n: the ratings and teachers on ratemyteachers.com are user-added–unfortunately, ratemyteachers.com is not a reliable source. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 19:45, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: Sorry for the long wait, I thought that statement wasn't worth my time. Anyway, the teachers aren't user-added; however, the reviews are. So you can use teachers on RMT as a source, just not reviews. L33tm4n (talk) 13:00, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

References

@L33tm4n: the teachers are user-generated–it's debatable whether or not the schools are, but the teachers definitely aren't. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 17:34, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 June 2021

Change the sentence "while taking out a cucumber, pear, and apple to represent male genitalia.[12][6]" to "while taking out a cucumber, pear, and apple.[12][6]". The mention of male genitalia is not obvious and none of the 2 references draw this conclusion. Gio1mtl (talk) 22:39, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

 Done per WP:OR. TGHL ↗ 🍁 17:25, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Do not update her subscriber count or the like without a reliable source

YouTube itself is not a reliable source, and cannot be used to update the subscriber count. The source we have right now says 40 000, and that's how it's staying until a reliable source is added. Clearfrienda ^💬 15:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

@Clearfrienda: If you're talking about what's cited in the subscriber and view counts, that's automatically cited. Also, how is YouTube not a reliable source for updating the subscriber and view counts? That's how you check them. L33tm4n (talk) 21:18, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@L33tm4n: Not on Wikipedia. No, it's not automatically cited, someone manually has to do that. Please learn your Wikipedia policies. See WP:RSPYT, for more information. It's not a reliable source for checking them, because it's primary. You must have a reliable news article or something with their subscriber count, whether it's outdated or not. Please do not re-add it again, or it could be considered, and we'll have to get dispute resolution. Clearfrienda ^💬 11:15, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Clearfrienda: "Please learn your Wikipedia policies." – Okay? In the policy you linked, YouTube talks about videos uploaded by anonymous users, not updating subscriber and view counts.

"Most videos on YouTube are anonymous, self-published, and unverifiable, and should not be used at all. Content uploaded from a verified official account, such as that of a news organization, may be treated as originating from the uploader and therefore inheriting their level of reliability. However, many YouTube videos from unofficial accounts are copyright violations and should not be linked from Wikipedia, according to WP:COPYLINK. See also WP:YOUTUBE and WP:VIDEOLINK."

You failed to check your policies, and got proven wrong as a result. Yes, YouTube is a primary source, but it can be used with consideration per WP:PRIMARYCARE. Please learn your Wikipedia policies.

–L33tm4n (talk) 20:52, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

friendly reminder to stay civil, and hopefully friendly :) doesn't WP:ABOUTSELF mean that a primary source is usable? Seems to pass the necessary requirements. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 20:56, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. :) L33tm4n (talk) 21:00, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Fair point, thanks theleekycauldron for resolving this dispute, however, secondary, reliable sources always take priority from primary ones. Clearfrienda ^💬 21:06, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Clearfrienda: I added a Social Blade source, how does that sound? L33tm4n (talk) 00:01, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

added new categories

OK, so I changed the year of birth missing category to 1964 births, and also added people from Montreal. is that ok with you? Thecharacterwannaie (talk) 17:48, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Update the Social Blade access date!

If you ever update Diekmeyer's YouTube stats and update date, remember to also update the access date on the Social Blade source, thank you. L33tm4n (talk) 00:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Social Blade probably can't be used, it's probably not considered reliable. Stick to using the stats, and therefore reference, directly from YouTube. Clearfrienda ^💬 11:51, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Clearfrienda: Believe it or not, Social Blade is used for almost every YouTuber's stats, so it's most likely considered reliable. I'll do some more digging on Social Blade's reliability and I'll let you know what I find. L33tm4n (talk) 21:01, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Go ask at the help desk, because it's usually directly from YouTube. Clearfrienda ^💬 02:34, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

@Clearfrienda: Thanks, I couldn't find anything anyway. I'll update you when I get a response if you're not pinged. L33tm4n (talk) 20:36, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2021

Sadly the vegan teacher died Augest 28 around 6pm. So sad she was truly a guiding pillar for those who were uneducated about how meat will slowly kill us. Please respect her and update her information: 2603:6010:7809:B1ED:859B:C0F9:95C2:3F9D (talk) 14:20, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:42, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

she literally uploaded a video yesterday? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 16:41, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

New TikTok Account

Hello, please add that she is evading ban by using her new tiktok @that.non.vegan.therapist Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dINoT58WrLM and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlNZv19Np7s — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.48.75 (talk) 00:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: for a biography article as controversial as this one, the sources generally need to be published, reliable, secondary sources. See WP:RSP for a list of reliable sources. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 00:39, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Categories

I have removed a number of categories that describe this person as LGBT, anti-racist, feminist, anti-religious and atheist as they don't seem backed up by the article or any reliable sources. If anyone disagrees with these removals please let me know. Thanks. —AFreshStart (talk) 19:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

agreed, that's not reflected in the sourcing. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 20:28, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I have the sources and you can search them yourself on YouTube. She has said that she is bisexual, fighting for LGBT righs and gay people to get married, and stopping racism in her country Canada in a [youtu.be/aVRAtOgJJ_w video] about Queer Kiwi. She is also critical of religions especially Christianity in some videos in her own channel (like [youtu.be/r5GRg0a8r18] and [youtu.be/VvPDGwvDKOo]) Is she an atheist? [youtu.be/SBbJNX3RN3M Yes], she is. Can I use her videos as the references? —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 23:58, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I know it's kind of ridiculous, isn't it? Yeah, the moral of the story is: Don't spend too much time on YouTube. —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 00:13, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, That Vegan Teacher shouldn't be considered a super reliable source about herself. I wouldn't consider it relevant enough to include in the article unless it were reflected in secondary sourcing. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 00:42, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Is the "Critics of religions" category acceptable to be added? —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 02:23, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I forgot to say this. That information came from her own mouth, so why isn't it reliable for you? Why should she lie about herself? —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:39, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, there's some chance I'm wrong, since a strict interpretation of WP:ABOUTSELF would necessitate that Diekmeyer is the only one who can assert her sexuality, and therefore a primary source is enough. However, according to the discussions at Talk:Trisha Paytas, I'm going to say that there's some foundation to say that publicity stunts or other ploys for attention don't necessarily translate to inclusion in the article. Given Diekmeyer's history of incendiary activism and accusations of homophobia, it's hard to give her the benefit of the doubt on that one. Furthermore, Diekmeyer's bisexuality isn't relevant to her notability—I could see inclusion if a secondary source thought it relevant enough to include in an article about her, but it looks like it's just one YouTube video. So, I don't see a reason to include it in the article. I could be wrong, but i don't think it's something that necessitates inclusion. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 18:12, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

There's some argument to including a blurb in the article that attributes directly to her, and not including it in the categories. The categories are Wikipedia's own voice. They assert that something is factual. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 18:13, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I can understand this. Some people did it to gain attention from others, but does the "Critics of religions" need a secondary source? I think this one does not. Criticism is an opinion so I can cite her video directly without using a secondary source, can't I? Well, again I can't find any secondary, reliable sources for it, but I believe it doesn't need one. What's your opinion? —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 23:39, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I'd agree, on that one you're probably fine theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 02:01, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

It is against Wikipedia policy to add categories that are not supported by sources on the article. We need independent secondary sources for the vegan teacher being a critic of Christianity or religion, not a YouTube video. Until reliable references are found the categories should not be on the article, it is a BLP violation. Psychologist Guy (talk) 22:47, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

That's a fair point, actually. It shouldn't be in the categories unless it's relevant enough to the article to include, which this isn't. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 22:57, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Some claims are not supported by a reliable source

The personal life section claims that she promotes anti-racism and LGBTQ rights. These claims, however, are backed only by a YouTube video on her own channel which is not a reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmazingTrilobite (talk • contribs) 18:54, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Oh really? What do you think is more reliable than what comes from her own mouth? YouTube video is enough, since we don't have much press reports about her. Let her do more controversy first. —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 21:58, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Her own statements in a YouTube video may be enough to support a claim like her identifying as a feminist, but not for claims like her promoting anti-racism and LGBTQ rights. She has also made statements in a now deleted TikTok video that contradict her claim about her promoting LGBTQ rights. You can see for yourself in this video (around the 2:16 mark). AmazingTrilobite (talk) 08:47, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

@AmazingTrilobite: No one cares. Even if her statements are contradictive—at least for you, not for me, who takes it as entertainment rather than a really big problem—so what? Diekmeyer has said it clearly, without any confusions, that she is an LGBT rights and anti-racism activist. I know, I know that she has made some homophobic comments or, probably, racist ones, but that does not prove anything. She criticised homosexual people for coming out as homosexual rather than coming out as an animal rights activist; I found it laughable, honestly, just for daily entertainment, unlike you who took that too seriously.

One, it is not a problem if one says that he or she is supportive of the LGBT community, and at the same time making comments that the society found to be homophobic. Yeah, it's not normal, at least for most people but it is Diekmeyer not the entire society. Let her deal with her own life. She doesn't care about the criticism, even if you attack her continuously, she won't stop, got it? I have watched the given video but that doesn't prove anything on Diekmeyer's Wikipedia page.

Two, on her racism. I honestly don't get for this one. Which racism you are referring to? Since, I don't really care about her personal life and just edited her page because I watched her videos for fun and then got some ideas to edit her Wikipedia pages, since Diekmeyer has one, can you give me a source? I would like to watch that one because I don't know that she is a racist too, as you said.

Three, Wikipedia also mentions of her homophobic comments in the "Career" section. Please take a look. How this makes her unappropriated to be included as an LGBT rights activist? Doesn't she say that herself? Probably, people disagrees with it because of her past homophobic comments but she really doesn't care, because she will do anything to promote animal rights. Animals are more important to Diekmeyer than her own image. Ok, go back to the Wikipedia problem. A label can be only attached to someone if he or she, on whom the label is attached to, claimed him or herself with the label. This is controversial, I know, but one's own mouth is the most reliable to be a source of his or her own biography. Maybe it is something made up but you don't live his or her life so you don't know what really happens. —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 09:47, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

1. If you want something that can be supported by her statements then "She identifies as a feminist and promotes anti-racism and LGBT rights" could be changed to something along the lines of "She identifies as a feminist and claims to promote anti-racism and LGBT rights".

2. I haven't said anything about racism other than her video doesn't support the claim that she promotes anti-racism. AmazingTrilobite (talk) 10:51, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

@AmazingTrilobite: Ok, I agree with your suggestion. Changed Y —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 10:57, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

GA

This article is small but long enough to get the good article status. What's your opinion? Before that, since primary sources are dominant in the article, please anyone help me to get more secondary sources for it. Thank you. —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 03:31, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

It could be better.

A few months ago I edited this article and it seemed higher quality then it is currently. This revision seems not as accurate as when I was working on it, and less verifiable. Krystal Kalb (talk) 05:51, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

@Krystal Kalb: Elaborate please? —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 06:22, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

For example, it says she is a singer-songwriter here, and though she has made some songs, they are just small, unprofessional ones to promote veganism (please tell me if I am wrong). Krystal Kalb (talk) 08:28, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

What do you mean? Her small career as a singer-songwriter does not mean that she is not a singer-songwriter. She had created 47 songs by 1999; that's a lot of songs, which means it is notable enough to be added in the lead. —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 09:30, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• That Vegan Teacher.webp

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:07, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• ThatVeganTeacher.webp

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:22, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2022

Change "Canadian animal rights activist. former educator and singer-songwriter" to "Canadian animal rights activist, former educator, and singer-songwriter" Raycr24 (talk) 17:42, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done Madeline (part of me) 21:19, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Why is this a article?

TVT is just known for controversy and starting stuff on TikTok and YouTube. Does it need a Wikipedia page? No. Overall this page feels like something from Fandom Wikis. SMBMovieFan (talk) 07:38, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree that the tone of the article can be unencyclopedic (as well as the sources used), but I think this article would pass if put up for deletion. But if you think this page warrants it, go ahead and nominate. QueenofBithynia (talk) 21:38, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2023

well all information is not correct and that vegan teacher is using Veganism as a weapon to attack poeple for being non vegan. Like YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Cameo and other media she using for attacking. She has raped two children. One in Canada somewhere near her house she has a photo of that sent to poeple and other children was a child was raped by Katie Karen diekmeyer in Italy back lane.she on Cameo to draw other people children in so she can rape them. That vegan teacher aka Kadie Karen diekmeyer told me her plans and her husband is with the children. Stuff like Twitter and Cameo are very easy to draw children because kids can get easy brainwashed by her fake veganism threats message. 2A02:C7C:D83F:D200:D0BE:6D47:A471:B2B6 (talk) 14:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 14:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

That Vegan Teacher recent videos

You guys have got to update her controversies section because she's gotten more unhinged. She recently posted two videos: one saying the slur "Tranny" in the title, and the second titled "Hitler was a good guy!" We have officially transcended past normal racism and homophobia and into pure insanity Vespovich (talk) 02:32, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

No sourcing on bisexual/LGBT Categories

Either there needs to be a source regarding these article categories in the actual article text, or these should be all removed. 2803:4600:1116:1457:BCDB:D52A:E7DA:65D9 (talk) 04:29, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)