Talk:Cambridge University primates

Exposed Brains
"BUAV also say their investigator discovered that monkeys who had had the tops of their scalps sawn off in order to have strokes induced, were left unattended with their brains exposed for 15 hours overnight, because Cambridge staff worked nine to five. [6]"
 * I was a bit suprised when I read this (i.e. sounds like the kind of thing that would get you sent to prison) but from reading the Guardian article I think it is based on a misreading of this:
 * "BUAV claimed they discovered monkeys which had the tops of their heads sawn off in order for a stroke to be induced and were then left for 15 hours without veterinary attention."
 * Which I think actually means that the monkeys had the tops of their heads sawn off, a stroke induced (see this ref) and then the whole lot sown back together and the animal then transferred to an incubator where it was then left without veterinary attention (because Cambridge didn't have 24hr veterinary coverage for some reason). This would be consistent with the actual surgery documented in the Cambridge experiments (see that ref), the concerns addressed in the government report, and would make more sense.--Coroebus 23:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Coroebus, I'll check again what the BUAV report actually says. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

New Section
It was pointed out to me that the content of this article does strictly not address, with balance, its subject according to the title. Thus I added a new section on primate experiments at Cambridge University (at least what i can find). I have also changed a few other things including the opening sentence, removed the suggestion the review would be published in summer 2006, reworded the misleading suggestion that "only" 3 staff looked after all the primates needs (the reality according to the report is that 3 staff did the housekeeping duties, but the scientists themselves are responsible for welfare of animals under procedures, and they most certainly do not work 9 to 5!). I also added the review's take on the "muscle tone" allegation. Thats it.  Rockpock e  t  01:48, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Pictures
I understand that all of these images have not been published under an acceptable free license, as there is no information to suggest they were published under anything other than standard copyright legislation, and so are being removed. 14:00 19/07/07

Fair use rationale for Image:BUAVCambridge2.jpg
Image:BUAVCambridge2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

POV issues
I am a bit unhappy about the neutrality here, we seem to be omitting to discuss anything about the title of the article except its contraversy. Do we have any references to support "wide public attention"? --BozMo talk 14:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Its not being omitted, I think its just that no-one has added more info about the science itself. I wrote Cambridge University primates, but if you have more detail to add, then please do so. Rockpock  e  t  19:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Marmoset.jpg
Image:Marmoset.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 15:05, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Marmoset2.jpg
The image Image:Marmoset2.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --01:31, 20 September 2008 (UTC)