Talk:Cancer Research UK

message: I've removed the section discussing the proportion of the charity's income spent on research per WP:FORUM. Rockpocket 17:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed 1

message: Cancer Research UK would like to suggest the following edits to its Wikipedia entry:
Add Scottish charity number:
(registered charity number in England and Wales: 1089464 and in Scotland: SC041666)
Insert the following paragraph beneath Imperial Cancer Research Fund paragraph:
The Cancer Research Campaign
In the 1920s, a group of doctors and scientists from the ICRF wanted to focus more heavily on clinical research rather than fundamental lab research.  They formed a new charity, the British Empire Cancer Campaign, later renamed The Cancer Research Campaign. Decades later, the two organisations would merge, forming Cancer Research UK in 2002.
Under ‘Research’:
In the financial year 2009/10 the charity spent £334 million on cancer research projects   (around 65% of its total budget).
(Note to Wikipedia editors: The 65% is not representative of how the charity processes donations as it includes retail. For every pound the charity receives, excluding its retail chain, 80 pence is available to spend on its work. In addition to the £334 million on research, in 2009/10 the charity spent a further £14 million on cancer information and advocacy. See the Annual Report and Accounts  or p22-23 of the Annual Review . )
The charity funds the work of over 4,000…
Around 40% of the charity’s research expenditure goes on basic laboratory research…
Under ‘Fundraising’:
44,500 regular volunteers
Thank you.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarastark1986 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for changes by CRUK

message: :Image:Logo cancer research uk.png 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) 13:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Logo cancer research uk.png

message: I would be grateful for views:
The following edit was criticised as "Extreme POV" (with which I would respectfully disagree), and I would like to suggest a redraft taking into account the criticisms made.
Original: "Cancer Research UK engages for-profit third party telephone fundraising companies to make unsolicited calls to supporters and potential supporters. In 2009, it was widely reported in the national press that great offence was caused to one recipient of such a call who was battling terminal cancer. Following this incident, and a Daily Mirror report on the questionable tactics employed by fund raising companies, Cancer Research temporarily suspended the use of its fundraising agencies GoGen and Pell and Bales, but has since re-engaged telephone fundraisers.[10][11][12][13]"
Upon re-reading, I would agree that the words "questionable tactics" represent POV and ought not feature in the edit.  Nevertheless, I do feel that it is a fact worth mentioning that CRUK make use of third party fundraisers, and I would suggest that these third party fundraisers are the main 'face' of the charity for many members of the public.
Are any views held regarding the following redraft, intended to address the criticisms levelled at the original?
Redraft: "Cancer Research UK engages for-profit third party telephone fundraising companies to make unsolicited calls to supporters and potential supporters, which was criticised in the national press in 2009 [insert link to Mirror article etc]. Cancer Research temporarily suspended the use of its fundraising agencies GoGen and Pell and Bales in 2009, but has since re-engaged telephone fundraisers." Wikip-ian-dia (talk) 11:20, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fundraising Section 

message: Cancer Research UK is turning its specialists loose on the internet to get them to tidy up the online encyclopedia - Wikipedia. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12887075 213.246.85.152 (talk) 14:02, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just for the record, Cancer Research UK brought in a team of experienced Wikipedians (including myself) from Wikimedia UK to train them how to engage with Wikipedia and to help them make their first edits. We have stayed in occasional touch since. Just as with any Wikipedia training we deliver, we have included advice on neutrality and conflict of interest policies, and as a result the CRUK staff are well aware of these issues. The training has been openly documented on the Wikimedia UK site. The involvement of Cancer Research UK staff in reviewing and improving Wikipedia articles is clearly a very positive thing for the encyclopedia. They're not merely allowed to contribute; they're welcome to. MartinPoulter (talk) 14:09, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC - Cancer charity 'tidies' Wikipedia 

message: The date format in the infobox is inconsistent with the rest of the article and different from the original date format used in the article. This article already used dmy format when the infobox was added  (4 February 2002 used in the lead), as it has done since 2006  so the inconsistent date format in the infobox should have been corrected at the time per WP:DATERET. January (talk) 07:38, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The date in the infobox currently reads as February 4, 2002 which is US format (see WP:STRONGNAT) and is inconsistent with the date format in the lead, which was there several years before the infobox was added. If no further objections are raised I intend to amend it to show as 4 February 2002. January (talk) 08:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox date format 

message: The CRUK 2013/14 Annual Report is now out.  COI issues I think prevent me from updating the figures etc in the article, which are now 3 years out of date (I did update the revenue to last year's previously). All available here Wiki CRUK John (talk) 11:36, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: And charity sector press stories:  and . Wiki CRUK John (talk) 10:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  2013/14 Annual Report now out 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Cancer Research UK. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110725134828/http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_043577.pdf to http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_043577.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100624083615/http://www.ukcmri.ac.uk:80/press/press_release5.html to http://www.ukcmri.ac.uk/press/press_release5.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:50, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Cancer Research UK. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.charitiesdirect.com/charities/top500.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120428031840/http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_075236.pdf to http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_075236.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120504194150/http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_075376.pdf to http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_075376.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141111111234/http://web-archive-sources.org/cr_075236.pdf to http://web-archive-sources.org/cr_075236.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:36, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 198.134.51.41 (talk) 20:17, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  tax decuctible