User talk:Darwinprimategroup

May 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Baboon Woman has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): \bblog(?:cu|fa|harbor|mybrain|post|savy|spot|townhall)?\.com\b (links: http://www.darwinprimategroup.blogspot.com/, http://www.darwinprimategroup.blogspot.com/ (redirect from http://www.darwinprimategroup.blogspot.com/)). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest). If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 07:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

May 2009
Hello, I created a page that contains little information regarding your Darwin Primate Group. Could you please edit it and maybe add some more information? Thank-you.--Villaboy8 (talk) 13:57, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Baboon Woman.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Baboon Woman.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 11:05, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

August 2020
Hello Darwinprimategroup. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Darwinprimategroup. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. -- VViking Talk Edits 13:32, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I am sorry but you have the wrong impression. There is no undisclosed financial stake for promoting the topic. The documentary Baboon Woman is about Karin Saks's work with baboons and my edits elaborated on that. My only reason for making the edits was to educate readers on baboons. The chacma baboon article promotes the idea that baboons are aggressive, dangerous and predatory - all misconceptions that cause unecessary fear in people who do not understand this species. That fear fuels tragedy. Baboons on the Cape Peninsula are killed and are facing extinction because of this. I would hope that Wikipedia would not want to contribute to the horror these animals go through by promoting misconceptions.Darwinprimategroup (talk) 11:13, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Darwinprimategroup


 * You do not need my permission to edit Wikipedia you just need to follow the rules that have been established by the community. You mention that you are not being paid to edit Wikipedia however your user name indicates you may be an employee of that organization, if you are you are being paid to edit even if your employer didn't ask you to edit. At the bare minimum you appear to have a Conflict of interest therefore you should be very careful editing articles that you do have a COI. Beyond that Just to be promotional, keep a neutral POV, and keep the article on topic, don't add additional information not directly related to the article.

Thank you for your comments.I am a primatologist and have volunteered to help baboons all over South Africa. My edits seek to educate the public on the true nature of baboons because they are being wiped out throughout Africa; they are treated as vermin. Your undoing of my edits on the chacma baboon article will certainly encourage those who kill baboons to continue doing so. Many of the points made on that article are made to justify the cruelty inflicted on this species for example comments pertaining to their äggressive, violent, formidable" nature and their capacity for killing "livestock" which is exaggerated to justify farmers killing them, hence my edit including the fact that their diet is primarily plant based. These comments evoke fear in the public who kill baboons because they wrongly believe their pets are at risk. The true status of baboons was added because someone has claimed that assessors for the IUCN have concluded that baboons remain unthreatened. How can they conclude that when there is not enough data on baboon populations, subpopulations face extinction and baboon populations are on the decline in some areas? The person that wrote that did so to justify the ongoing killing of baboons in SA. Yes, scientists are paid to produce science for our nature conservation authorities so that they can kill baboons under the banner of "science". If you were a primate expert, you would have noted that and understood my motives. My user name was created because of my support for baboons. However, I am not an employee of the darwin primate group which is a nonprofit group. The documentary - Baboon Woman -  is about Karin Saks's work with baboons. Surely adding information that supports her baboon work should not be undone? I support anyone who works to save the chacma baboon and that includes the Darwin Primate Group and Baboon Matters. Neither of these organisations are profit driven. As I am not too familiar with Wiki's requirements but will try to be in the future, please could you check the chacma baboon article and undo the points that are emotionally driven, unscientific and made to justify the persecution of chacma baboons? Thankyou.