Talk:Monkey: Difference between revisions
Gottoupload (talk | contribs) |
Gottoupload (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 169: | Line 169: | ||
hiej m fjyeuewio rtuywiutw t dyteyirutpw ruituowieo weuw0 qqhnjie3pu325yp923y5t534urehtiuyhbudhieq3rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr 5uy5uuhhr8dd uuruuew3iidd gjgjrekkxmdkdk elwowle rii594worrjtt ep, tktow[iw2po23 b5=9kj5op34iu5w45udkfjwioru <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/204.108.96.21|204.108.96.21]] ([[User talk:204.108.96.21|talk]]) 21:14, 13 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
hiej m fjyeuewio rtuywiutw t dyteyirutpw ruituowieo weuw0 qqhnjie3pu325yp923y5t534urehtiuyhbudhieq3rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr 5uy5uuhhr8dd uuruuew3iidd gjgjrekkxmdkdk elwowle rii594worrjtt ep, tktow[iw2po23 b5=9kj5op34iu5w45udkfjwioru <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/204.108.96.21|204.108.96.21]] ([[User talk:204.108.96.21|talk]]) 21:14, 13 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
:I didn't know we could add videos. [[User:Gottoupload|Gottoupload]] ([[User talk:Gottoupload|talk]]) 00:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC) |
:I didn't know we could add videos to wikipedia articles. [[User:Gottoupload|Gottoupload]] ([[User talk:Gottoupload|talk]]) 00:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:06, 18 February 2009
![]() | Primates Start‑class Top‑importance | |||||||||
|
Hey dont be dissing monkeys they rock MONKEYS ROCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Monkeys
How do I flag it up for a major rewrite? (I'd try, but I think a primatologist should get involved) It's the sort of niff-naff and trivia that devalues the entire Wikipedia project: there are 593 words on what monkeys actually are, followed by a strange section on monkeys as pets (552 words), some stuff about animal testing (complete with carefully selected emotive picture) and a completely random section on the eating of monkeys which could be an interesting discussion on bushmeat, but instead tells us that the chines don't eat monkey brains, Islamic dietary laws forbid monkey-eating and aids may have been transmitted to humans by eating monkeys (unless the monkeys were eaten raw this seems unlikely.)
After that we have the bane of wikipedia: the trivia section, here disguised as "monkeys in literature". The extent of "monkeys are the main source of drug dealers in new york city in literature" appears to be that a monkey is a character in a chinese novel, Hanuman is a monkey-like Hindu god (true, but is that literature?). Monkey from the TV series Monkey was a monkey (deliberate repition to indicate the redundancy of the statement, as was Curious George). The triviaists favourite Terry Pratchett makes an appearance. And then there is a misplaced statement about mandrills. And something about the chinese zodiac.
hey —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.184.47.60 (talk) 20:48, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
The links section is equally poor (two antivivisection sites, a thing about pet monkeys and a helping hands site). The only two sourced statements are a food article in the guardian claiming that chinese people don't appear to eat monkey brains and a biblical vegetarian site is used for a source for the SIV-HIV claim.
Proposed restructure:
Monkeys and their relationship to people is a valid topic, but is the keeping of pets the most important element?
1.0 Characteristics 2.0 Name 3.0 Classification 4.0 Monkeys and humans 4.1 Monkeys in science (present NPOV of animal testing) 4.1.1 Theories of relationship between SIV/HIV and possible transmission (may simply link to relevant page) 4.2 As food (must discuss bushmeat or the article is pointless) 4.3 As Pets 4.4 Etc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.39.84.3 (talk) 04:34, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
The trivialists will have to start their own page for "Monkeys in Popular Culture" - there's an argument for discussing monkeys and religion say, but making this a list of monkeys in books and films is the sort f thing that Wikipedia can do without
If you want to see what I mean about the difference between an uncontrolled random page like monkey compare with the entry for ape
They're adaptation is their tale.
Jim68000 22:10, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree, one of the worst Wikipedia pages I have seen. Mwinog2777 05:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I also agree. In response to Jim68000's initial question, to flag it for rewrite I would add both the templates { { cleanup-rewrite } } and { { Expert-subject|Primates } } to the top of the article. I'd do it myself, but I apparently haven't had my account long enough. Bloody semi-protection policy. Gitman 21:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Okay, templates have been added. Gitman 18:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
I fully agree that this page is unworthy of Wikipedia. Such an important family of biological organisms deserves a good strong article not one that begins lecturing people about religion. My 12 year old came across this when doing an essay and even she flagged it as incomplete and tending to go off in needless tangents. Why on earth does such drivel merit the special treatement of being exempt from editing. The whole entry should be trashed and someone else start from scratch.
- It's protected because it gets vandalized often. Instead of complaining, work on possible edits on the talk page, and I or another admin will make the change or unprotect it. BTW: "monkey" isn't a biological family. It's two related groups containing many families. That information is in the very first paragraph of the article. If you want good information, go to those articles. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Monkey as pets
This article appears to be written by a monkey owner or pet dealer, as it barely covers the biological aspects of the species, then they mildly warn of physical dangers of owning a monkey, followed by a blurb of success stories. Then, at the end, someone added the word "opinionated" to a reference that talked about the negatives of monkey ownership, when this is the view of veterinarians throughout the U.S. and Europe. No mention is made of the health hazards that monkeys pose, being able to carry AIDS, hepatitis, plus alot of our common disease, such as measles, etc., let alone the public health threat that can happen with an ebola outbreak (see The Hot Zone, and those were monkeys in a quarantined facility!). I think this article is a travesty, and agree with the previous poster that it should be deleted and completely rewrote by someone who does not endorse monkeys as pets.
Thank you, John Edwards, DVM Audubon Center for the Research of Endangered Species New Orleans, LA
Given the concerns raised above, and since the section is entirely unreferenced and seemed to be unreasonably prominent in the article, I've moved the monkey as pets section here so it can be worked on (or disregarded) as appropriate. If we can develop something that looks good it can be moved back into the main body of the text. -- Siobhan Hansa 19:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- It's odd that it's been removed entirely without any reference left to monkeys as pets. A section on monkeys as pets can be included summary style if it gets too long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pengo (talk • contribs) 01:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Monkeys as pets
Historical use as pets by Western Europeans
When the British first began to explore Africa, young monkeys were often captured to provide entertainment during long voyages. Some were later transferred to domestic zoos, and in fact many modern captive monkeys in the UK are descended from individuals captured during the Napoleonic and Victorian eras. Kent still to this day has the largest population of monkeys in the UK. According to legend, one of the early British captive monkeys was lost at sea and washed up ashore near Hartlepool, England, where it was mistaken for a Frenchman and hanged.[citation needed] The people of Hartlepool have since borne the nickname "monkey hangers."
Suitability as pets
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Highway_Robbery_by_an_Indian_Monkey_-_ILN_1891.jpg/200px-Highway_Robbery_by_an_Indian_Monkey_-_ILN_1891.jpg)
Although they may appear to be friendly, keeping monkeys as pets can be very difficult. While baby monkeys are usually as easy to keep clean as a human infant (by diapering), monkeys that have reached puberty usually remove their diapers and cannot be toilet trained. They require constant supervision and mental stimulation. They usually require a large amount of attention. Monkeys cannot handle being away from their owners for long periods of time, such as family trips, due to their need of attention. Bored monkeys can become extremely destructive and may, for example, smear or throw their own feces. There often needs to be a lot of time set aside for cleaning up messes the monkey might make. Most adolescent monkeys begin to bite unpredictably and pinch adults and children. Any surgical means to stem this behavior (such as removing the teeth or fingertips of the monkey) is widely considered cruel, and it is usually difficult to find veterinarians who will carry out such procedures: even exotic-animal veterinarians may not be familiar with them. Monkeys eventually can become wild and difficult to control upon reaching adulthood. The monkeys may also become aggressive even to their owners. In some cases their behavior can change abruptly, making it hard for the owner to fully understand or control them.
Some people do report having long and rewarding relationships with monkeys. Monkeys are known to get attached to their first owner, so switching from one to another can be traumatic to the monkey and may aggravate behavioral problems. It is not easy for a monkey to get used to a new environment. Monkeys need to be placed in social areas. It is also expensive to care for a monkey — housing, food, and veterinary care can become very costly.
Legality as pets
In most large metropolitan areas in the U.S. it is illegal to keep monkeys as pets in the home; even in places where they are legal, a Department of Agriculture permit is usually required. Their legal status as pets varies in other countries. Permits may be issued to those who qualify in the caring of monkeys.
new & old world
what is this silly thing about old and new worlds it is annoying 124.170.244.50 08:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- There is no one coherent group of animals called monkeys. Instead, there are two group of primates that are closely related. - UtherSRG (talk) 09:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
"Highly sociable animals, monkeys are kept in many different environments"
What does this sentence (from the Monkeys in Captivity section) mean? What is it trying to say?
The best I can figure is that once it made a point, but someone removed enough POV to make it pointless. As it stands, it doesn't seem to say anything at all, certainly not about monkeys in captivity.
Are there objections to cutting it entirely, explanations for its presence, ideas on how to fix it?Gnfnrf 04:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Monkey attacks
How-to guide on surviving them: Tsai, Michelle (2007-10-22). "How To Fight Monkeys: What should you do if you're surrounded by angry macaques?". Slate. -- 67.98.206.2 18:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting, but it doesn't make sense to include a section on monkey attacks or there would have to be a similar section in every other animal page. There already is a page Organisms that are dangerous to humans that has a list like this - although monkeys aren't on it.Bob98133 19:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. (wikibooks is for that), but it would be worth mentioning that monkey attacks do occur. —Pengo 01:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Food
The food section says that South Indians eat Monkey's brain and it references to a "Indiana Jones - Temple of Doom" move. South Indians are predominantly vegeterian and even the non-vegeterain never heard of some one eating Monkey. I am unable to remove this section, can some one remove this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacktheripper82 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
People actually do eat monkey brains. I was offered them in Vietnam. I saw the brain and was quoted a price. If you doubt it, go to Hanoi's old quarter. You can get them in many places. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.75.233 (talk) 05:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Fix Map
Somebody please improve the map showing distribution of monkeys there are morocan monkeys it does not show the Barbary Macaque. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zaharous (talk • contribs)
- If you can find the date, we can add it to the map. As it is, the map contains the data that we know. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- Zaharous is correct, this is the range map of the Barbary Macaque. The map should be updated accordingly. Jack (talk) 12:19, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Is this correct?
"Calling apes "monkeys" is incorrect. Calling either a simian is correct."
I thought that in the Cladistics sense that apes are monkeys? Woland37 (talk) 18:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- You are incorrect. Cladistically, the three groups are simians. Simian = New World monkeys + (Old World monkeys + apes). - UtherSRG (talk) 22:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, I see now. Thank you very much. Woland37 (talk) 18:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
I have to disagree. Excluding apes from monkeys is blatant paraphyly - people have been drawn and quartered for lesser crimes. Old world monkeys are more closely related to apes than to new world monkeys. I know that in popular science it's common to distinguish monkeys and apes (probably because humans don't like being compared to monkeys), but from a scientific point of view, apes are monkeys. Edit: as I understand, this page is protected. If the adminstrators want me to, I'd be glad to write a carification note on this point. Toitoine (talk) 21:11, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
- With whom are you disagreeing? It seems like you are saying exactly what I said: Simiin = New World monkey + (Old World monkey + ape) - UtherSRG (talk) 22:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
- if you use the distinction new world monkey and old world monkey, it may be true (although I have to check recent molecular phylogenies. I'll try to do it soon). But if you lump the two together in monkeys, then you have to include apes in this clade.Toitoine (talk) 00:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
monkeys in relation to humans?
I prefered the older Monkeys in Captivity heading. It's hard to determine what the moneky's relationship might be with an animal experimenter who might be sacrificing the monkey. Phrased as a relationship makes it appear as if the monkeys have entered into these agreements voluntarily whereas they are functions of being captive. Perhaps this should be a separate section, since there are instances where monkeys do interact with humans - frequently in Asia and India - but using a wild animal as a pet, service animal or laboratory subject has more to do with captivity than relationships. Really, this is a Humans in relation to monkeys section. Bob98133 (talk) 16:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I think the evolutionary relationship of monkeys to humans should be discussed here.Miska1 (talk) 00:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
New section
Don't you think that this article could use a few new sections? I think a section about monkeys in popular culture could be a good section. Like jack the monkry in POTC would be a good one to add. Excitinginterception7 (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- Trivia sections, which a "in popular culture" section would be, are discouraged. So no, please do not add one. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
well, i guess you can! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.130.141.158 (talk) 00:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. A section about monkeys in pop culture would be trivial and looked down upon. I wouldn’t bother adding one.--DavidD4scnrt (talk) 20:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
some people dont believe in evolution they say adam and eve created us...they are wrong. primates evolved to become us.we first started as a type of huge underwater sea animal. then slowly become to evolve into landwalkers.we are infact related to monkeys! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simesecat (talk • contribs) 00:33, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Video
I added this only video:
- I deleted this video. Apart from it not being in English, it appeared to only show a man speaking endlessly to a caged monkey. Was there a point to posting this? How does it help the article? Bob98133 (talk) 12:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
hiej m fjyeuewio rtuywiutw t dyteyirutpw ruituowieo weuw0 qqhnjie3pu325yp923y5t534urehtiuyhbudhieq3rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr 5uy5uuhhr8dd uuruuew3iidd gjgjrekkxmdkdk elwowle rii594worrjtt ep, tktow[iw2po23 b5=9kj5op34iu5w45udkfjwioru —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.108.96.21 (talk) 21:14, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- I didn't know we could add videos to wikipedia articles. Gottoupload (talk) 00:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)