vegetarianism seems awfully redundant to me. It's the site name. I think it's safe to assume that questions are about some subset of vegetarianism without tagging it as such.
veganism is useful though, as that's a specific subset.
It's blacklisted now. Sorry about that - another side-effect of tweaking the subdomain choice ("vegetarianism" vs "vegetarian") during site configuration.
veganism is still alive and well.
I disagree completely.
Since, there is huge influx of "subset" participants from certain groups such as vegans, it biases the content (and answers) in that direction.
Why not allow people to pose questions towards the superset "vegetarian / ism" such that the responses do not go towards a specific subset or more towards the superset?
Also, why not understand what kind of subsets exist (as I have explained in my post/ response, and allow people to also direct them towards the subsets that are not "vegan".
Now, coming to the American/ Western worlds terminology use,
- Vegan - Plant only
- Lacto-Veg - Plant + Dairy (+maybe Honey) = Pure Vegetarian in India
- Ovo-Lacto-Veg - + Egg to the above = Eggetarian in India, maybe vegetarian in China (as lot of dishes that Chines call veg contain eggs - We have to caution against those too)
- Pescatarian - Veg + Fish - No meat (not sure how they are about eggs, mostly yes)
- The Pesco-veg - Mentioned in Riker's answer is a new one to me, if at all such exists. Every day you learn something new.
- Flexitarian - They well, define as and how and when what they wish to have and be :)