Talk:Marian Dawkins

message: About the criticism on this page:
Jim Robertson, the author of 'Exposing the Big Game: Living Targets of a Dying Sport' wrote "This new and unwelcomed project makes me wonder if she's (Dawkins is) not actually an emotional automaton programmed to react to stimuli but lacking the ability to think and feel"
This criticism above is particular scientific, it makes the case for human emotions as watertight as possible and thereby to strengthen it. 
The news sources "Huffington post" added in the article is notoriously unreliable.124.168.53.242 (talk) 22:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Scientific Criticism

message: An Editor recently moved Marian Stamp Dawkins to Marian Dawkins on the basis that the University web-site uses the name Marian Dawkins.  This is correct, however, on that page it states "My personal webpage..." which links to .  On the personal webpage, the name Marian Stamp Dawkins is used.  There may be reasons why the University website uses only Marian Dawkins.  I noticed that her most recent book is authored by "Marian Stamp Dawkins".__DrChrissy (talk) 00:20, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, up to now she has used Marian Stamp Dawkins for her publications. "Stamp" was her maiden name. However, since she recieved her CBE two days ago she has been using the name Marian Ellina Dawkins Still, the editor who made the name change should have discussed it here first. At the moment most readers will know her as Marian Stamp Dawkins, and the article should reflect that somewhere. --Epipelagic (talk) 06:29, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The CBE reference is broken. Not an valid citation. 124.168.28.54 (talk) 07:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move 

message: :::Epipelagic said '"Stamp" was her maiden name.' How does he know so much about her? He is not connected with MD? He has been following DrChrissy's move on multiple pages (see editing history of animal welfare, animal welfare science, pain in animals and this page). And the main page he is managing Animal consciousness‎ (almost like OWNed by him) is a field of study of MD. Does he connect to MD and DrChrissy? Or something else can explain? 124.149.100.133 (talk) 11:33, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I wanted to add this yesterday. Epipelagic has also been attacking me using lies and defamation because I want to add criticism to MD.124.170.240.130 (talk) 22:17, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It is common knowledge that Marian Dawkins' maiden name is Stamp.  Those people who know anything about animal behaviour or animal welfare would know that.  Try a simple search on Amazon .  I think you are demonstrating your lack of knowledge about animal welfare...again.__DrChrissy (talk) 16:27, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, you lied, DrChrissy, 1)Your link doesn't show stamp is her maiden name. 2)This kind of personal knowledge is nothing to do with academic work.124.170.240.130 (talk) 21:47, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Including in The Times, where it was announced: (Wednesday, Aug 23, 1967; pg. 8; Issue 57027; col A). Still not mentioned in the article though. Barney the barney barney (talk) 10:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The MOS says that in biographies, the most commonly recognised name should be used as the title of the article.  In my opinion, and obviously mine is only one of many, I believe she is most commonly known as Marian Dawkins, followed by Marian Stamp Dawkins.  I offer no evidence to substantiate this - it is simply my opinion - having worked in animal welfare for 25 years.__DrChrissy (talk) 15:02, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Stamp

message: the actual criticism was removed, why?.124.168.28.54 (talk) 08:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Editors are unlikely to take the time to read an external website, then work out what you are talking about, then consider why such material might be added, then provide an explanation as to why something was removed. That is doubly so given the stridency of comments made earlier on this page (someone has a COI, someone is lying, something is censorship). Please take a couple of days off to give everyone a break, then start from the beginning while assuming we are all here to help the encyclopedia. The WP:HELPDESK can provide how-to advice, and you might find someone there willing to comment on the general approach to adding "criticism" to WP:BLPs. However, what I said earlier applies, and while this may seem unusual to you, it is an everyday occurrence on Wikipedia because there is always someone wanting to add negative opinions to an article. Does Beckoff have an article here? That would be a good place for his opinions. Johnuniq (talk) 11:28, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: this sentence was removed by 'I am one of many': "Evolutionary biologist, Marc Bekoff, vigorously criticised Dawkins for denying a large body of scientific data.[3]" The edits watered down Bekoff's critisim.124.149.100.133 (talk) 11:45, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: In the same source, Bekoff also criticised MD for other unprofessional academic conducts such as personal attack and misinterpretation of his opinions. 124.170.240.130 (talk) 22:52, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Unexplained removal of Bekoff's criticism

message: See how much propaganda she added into the article. I already notice a original research she added to promote MD "These techniques are now used widely in animal welfare science." The citation is from MD's own work from 1985. No, an 1985 publication from the subject cannot provide information of the current recognition. It has to come from recent publication of other authors.124.170.240.130 (talk) 22:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: DrChrissy did a very nice job cleaning up this article.  Please take sometime and read all of the links that have been provided to you about Wikipedia policy.  It is clear that you do not understand the concepts of neutrality, conflict of interest, and ownership on Wikipedia.  Also, consider this a warning that your behavior at this article talk page is WP:INCIVIL and that you are behaving disruptively.  Please take some time to read and consider how Wikipedia works and then participate.  I'm more than willing (as are others) to give you advice and help, you need to cooperate with us by learning policy and treat others with respect. I am One of Many (talk) 22:16, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The only thing I want to say for now is, your position is obviously biased. I pointed out an original research in her edits, which is used to prompt MD, and you are blind to it.124.170.240.130 (talk) 22:31, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I just noticed another original research DrChrissy added. She claims MD is known for animal welfare. 1) this piece of information are not supported  by references  2)CBE is a political title, not opinion from an academic/peer source. Quality of scientific research are usually based on peer opinions 3)she is know for work in animal behaviour.124.170.221.69 (talk) 02:52, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

text: AslanEntropy appears to have dropped his/her concern.__DrChrissy (talk) 03:22, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Offtopic