Talk:World Animal Protection

message: I think it should be mentioned in the article, that WSPA has advertisements that don't use graphic footage of animal abuse, or abused animals to get their funding. This is unlike ads by the ASPCA for example, which try to get funding by showing images of abused animals, typically dogs and cats, in cages or being rescued from missions. I find it rather hypocritical of a foundation claiming to be against the exploitation of animals, exploiting their own animals to gain charity. So I feel people should know that WSPA does not do that, which I find to be very respectable. Violet yoshi (talk) 08:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WSPA's advertising free of animal exploitation

message: :Image:LogoWSPA.gif 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 Wikipedia: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) 13:07, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:LogoWSPA.gif

message: I view WSPA's neutering of stray animals as cruel treatment i wouldn't like it and i bet if cats and dogs could talk they wouldn't want it either. Sparkler99 (talk) 13:41, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your brilliant insight on the matter. The reason cats and dogs get spayed/neutered is that 2.7 million are euthanized every year in the US alone. While I'm sure getting your balls chopped off or your ovaries removed isn't the world's greatest experience, it's probably better than living your last days alone in a shelter and then getting killed. Damienivan (talk) 02:30, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Or more importantly having kittens and puppies that go feral and starve to death because they breed faster than adoption rates. --Roguebfl (talk) 05:22, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There are better ways to prevent animals from breeding than neutering, such as with drugs, but I wouldn't consider it cruel. Alex of Canada (talk) 21:03, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cruel treatment 

message: Does it have associations with the various nations SPCAs? or PETA? etc... --Roguebfl (talk) 21:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: They don't appear to be associated directly with ether group. They have a link to PETA in one pdf but nothing that needs mention in the article.Donhoraldo (talk) 01:34, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Associations 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. Community Tech bot (talk) 21:52, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion