Talk:Dubbing (poultry)

Neutrality

The practice may or may not be valid/good etc. However, the article is arguing only one side, and using biased sources. Either neutral sources need to be found, or the opposite argument added, or the pov/negative material needs to be removed. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:55, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

The article clearly states why dubbing is done, i.e. the supposed benefits Surely this makes the article balanced. After considerable research, I can find no objective 'evidence' that dubbing has the benefits it is supposed to. DrChrissy (talk) 17:35, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

That would be WP:OR. Someone else has to do that research and publish it. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Which aspects of the lack of research are you taking issue with? Dubbing clearly occurs and interested organisations have commented on the ethical and welfare aspects of this. Is this not simply reporting facts? DrChrissy (talk) 17:44, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

After considerable research - That is what I mean. You can certainly put criticism in. However, no input from farmers groups, etc has been included. That creates pov. Your saying that based on your research - such evidence does not exist, is original research. Find some neutral source (newspaper, magazine, not an advocacy site) that says such evidence does not exist, and then its kosher. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:47, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

The first three references in the article are from people/organisations that appear to be involved in poultry rearing, showing etc so there IS input from 'farmers groups'...they are describing why and how to do the dubbing. DrChrissy (talk) 17:56, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I stand corrected on that point. In that case, if you qualify the negative information like "According to groups such as the XXXX, dubbing ...." then I would be satisfied to remove the pov template. We just can't take the opposition point of view and make that the "truth" of the article Gaijin42 (talk) 18:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dubbing (poultry). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120405112642/http://www.shahbazinanatolianshepherds.com/dubbing.htm to http://www.shahbazinanatolianshepherds.com/dubbing.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121115143751/http://www.freewebs.com/cajunyankee/dubbing.htm to http://www.freewebs.com/cajunyankee/dubbing.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140617154058/http://www.fawc.org.uk/reports/pb3907/broil028.htm to http://www.fawc.org.uk/reports/pb3907/broil028.htm

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:53, 14 September 2017 (UTC)