Talk:Colin Blakemore

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Untitled[edit]

Spiny, here you are again editing an animal-rights-related article you know nothing about. Colin Blakemore very famously came to the attention of animal-rights activists over the kitten experiments. He is perhaps better known in the UK than any other research scientist because of this attention. You are quite right to request a source, of course, no matter how well-known a case it is, but to call it speculation is bizarre. SlimVirgin (talk) 07:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

"He is perhaps better known in the UK than any other research scientist because of this attention," says SlimVirgin. I'm calling bullshit. That's a quite an example of hyperbole you got there. Ask the commonfolk in the UK to name you one research scientist off the top of their heads--any one. I'm betting Blakemore doesn't roll off their tongues. 68.46.183.96 (talk) 07:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I've restored the material and added two sources (one newspaper, one animal-rights campaign) saying that it was the kitten experiments that made him notorious. There are hundreds of other sources available that say the same. SlimVirgin (talk) 08:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Is this still a stub? Or can that designation be removed? Scottkeir 18:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

It can be (and now has been) removed. Thanks! Semiconscioustalk 19:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

SlimVirgin - please read [1] This is relevent to Colin Blakemore's bio - he is the major driving force behind this and this will be his legacy, as it were, for better or worse.

Balance[edit]

The intro needs a lot of work. It is horribly unbalanced. JFW | T@lk 15:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

By all means, add something about his work, JFW. The thing about Blakemore is that it's the animal rights campaign that makes him known to the general public. His name is never (or never that I've seen) mentioned by the media without that being mentioned too, or being the sole reason they're writing about him. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Historically, that is true, SV, but much less so these days. His work as the (soon to be ex-) head of the MRC is the main reason he is newsworthy these days [2]. Rockpocket 18:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
That's only since March 2 this year. I think if we were to try to write an article that omitted all mention of his campaign in favor of animal research and the AR movement's campaign against him, we'd be left with almost nothing that would make him clearly notable in Wikipedia terms. The AR thing is such a huge part of his public life that the lead definitely has to stress it. However, I'd have no problem with someone adding other material too. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I completely agree, SV, that his AR issues are important and should stay - they are the reason the man on the street might know his name. But the man on the street will also only know John Seigenthaler, Sr. for a specific reason, that doesn't mean to say that is the only reason he is notable. There is little doubt that Blakemore would be notable irrespective of his AR issues. The man is the most senior scientist in the UK and has a huge influence on policy. He would meet at least 5 of the 6 criteria at WP:PROF easily and would be notable as an administrator in addition to his scientific achievements.
Further - and speaking as someone who follows his actions pretty closely - I can only find two major stories where he has been mentioned in an animal rights context in the last few years (thats the call to keep primate testing on the table in the UK and the People's Petition). There are more news stories than that regarding his position at the MRC in the last week alone. The AR campaign against him of historical interest, but it is of minor importance to his current activities. Lets not try to pretend AR "made" Blakemore, that is doing him, and thus this article, a huge disservice. Rockpocket 19:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

A researcher needs to have some rather unusual experience to qualify as head of the MRC. Just sewing cats' eyelids closed is not enough. Did he gain any special prizes? Which academic post was he in prior to his appointment to the MRC, and at which university? All much more important than allegations (subjective by necessity) by others? JFW | T@lk 00:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

By all means add some material about his career. I'd like to delete his photograph, by the way. Whenever I come across an image I uploaded under the old fair use policy, I'm deleting it if it doesn't fit the current rationale, and this doesn't. If anyone else wants to re-upload it, I won't object. The best thing would be to ask him to release one. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

It's a shame there's not much about his research here. He had some pretty groundbreaking papers in the 80s--at least for the Neuroscience field. His work, combined with that of Barlow, Hubel, Wiesel, Stryker, Hensch, Kasamatsu, Shatz, Bear, etc. really taught us almost everything in the textbooks these days concerning the development of the retina-LGN-cortex connection, the sensory system we know most about and that continues to stand as a model for how the other sensory systems work. This work opened up, directly and indirectly, a whole slew of new topics in the neuroscience field, including the ideas of plasticity, activity-dependent wiring patterns, columnar organization of neuronal circuit modules, systems neuroscience, etc. Similar work using the same model system led to Hubel and Wiesel winning the Nobel Prize in 1981.

Unfortunately, the damn animal rights activist sidebar takes up more space than the article. The irony is despite the hullabaloo raised by the animal rights activists concerning Blakemore's research, the kitten continues to be a model used for this kind of research. Monocular deprivation experiments are still being performed to this day and continue to provide us with a wealth of new findings. 68.46.183.96 (talk) 07:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It is a shame, if you happen to have some insight into his research, perhaps you could expand that section youself. Rockpocket 07:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Sarah Blakemore?[edit]

Are the two related? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.9.115.201 (talk) 08:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Significant works?[edit]

It would be good if someone could add a section giving a bibliography of significant publications by Blakemore. Robert P. O'Shea (talk) 06:37, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Colin Blakemore. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:59, 10 August 2017 (UTC)