Talk:Primate Freedom Project

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of animal rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Animal rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Animal rightsTemplate:WikiProject Animal rightsAnimal rights articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Thanks, User:Calton for your opinion that the subject of the article does not satisfy the notability guideline of Wikipedia. But I think it could given the suggested guidelines for organizations:
"Organizations are usually notable if the scope of activities are national or international in scale and information can be verified by a third party source."
"Notability can be asserted for organizations through: Inclusion in third party published materials."
The Primate Freedom Project is national in scope, as it focuses on the uses of nonhuman primates throughout the country. The Primate Freedom Project's work has been the subject of news articles and radio interviews across the country. Two such citations have been added to support this.Rbogle 17:08, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marilyn Carroll[edit]

Is there a reason for the link to the article on Marilyn Carroll? If she is the only person that is actively be campaigned against I could understand the link, but if there are others I don't see the reason to have a link to her but no one else. Umn student 15:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because the other ones don't have Wikipedia profiles. You can see a list from uclaprimatefreedom.com and utahprimatefreedom.com. If you find a researcher who does have a profile, then you should definitely list it. Since the Minnesota Primate Freedom Project is an OFFICIAL chapter of the Primate Freedom Project, I feel that we should keep her link up and if you find links to other researchers (there aren't THAT many being campaighned against), then you should add them also.Carniv 01:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by other articles from the animal rights/activism template, listing a "see also" to a particular researcher isn't the norm. If you have an example of other pages that do so, I'd say leave it on, but it just doesn't seem to fit, especially since she isn't mentioned in the main article at all. Umn student 05:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal[edit]

I'm doing some major edits starting at the 3rd to the last paragraph.

1 paragraph: Where has the Primate Freedom Project ever advocated any type of activism? Second, where had the Primate Freedom Projected listed illegal activities? The UCLA Primate Freedom Project may have but would need to go under a different section since it is not the Primate Freedom Project as a whole, just an autonomous chapter.

2 paragraphs: It isn't the UCLA Primate Freedom Project that has done "violent acts". It was the ALF. Totally different group. And this is also opinion.

3 paragraph: The writer comes right out front saying it is his/her opinion. Therefore it has been removed. Carniv (talk) 20:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]