Talk:Kangaroo industry

Australia: Biota Low‑importance

	Australia portal Kangaroo industry is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Agriculture: Livestock B‑class Low‑importance

	Agriculture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Livestock task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Animal rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of animal rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Animal rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Animal rightsTemplate:WikiProject Animal rightsAnimal rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biased perspective in favour of culling

"The conservation of the ecosystem calls for a balance, so if too many kangaroos have a negative impacts on it, this requires and justifies the management of the native kangaroo populations in conservation reserves. dingos are the only non-human predators to limit the growth of kangaroo populations."

Requires and justifies is a moral opinion, not a fact. Humans are the single greatest cause of habitat and species loss, logically we should be culled. Most likely what they mean to imply is, humans are more intelligent than kangaroos, so we have the right to kill them for whatever reason we see fit. However, there are many reasons to think that kangaroos and other animals experience the same physical and emotional sensations as we do, which is the truly important factor in moral considerations, not intelligence.

A species is a concept, it does not suffer. Individual animals suffer, in the same way humans do. --Kajatureta (talk) 01:42, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

matterial copied from www.kangaroo-industry.asn.au with permission

I don't think that was the wisest move. Large pieces of this article read like an advertisement for the kangaroo industry, largely because you copied that material. There's no mention of any criticism/opposing viewpoints, and there are several statements that are vague and sound biased. And really, the whole article needs to have other references cited to back up the bold statements made. Some of the sources are good (especially the government ones), but it's not enough. In addition, none of the sources are recent. If I get time, I'll try to tackle the editing myself. In the meantime, I'm leaving this message to let people know the article needs serious work done before it's up to encyclopedic standards. I encourage any steps taken to add some objectivity here. Lairfans12 (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kangaroo industry. 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/20080828140421/http://www.fate.unsw.edu.au/glance/index.htm to http://www.fate.unsw.edu.au/glance/index.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) 23:12, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updated version from Feb 2022

Dear fellow wikipedians, when I stumbled across this article I decided to dedicate some efford in oder to improve it and afterwards removed the two tags (pasted with this entry) which were displayed. English is not my native language, so if there are any stilistic problems I appreciate help. I made an effort to eradicate the advertisement-sound of the text and provide some sources, however most governmental sources and really sound like something should be a) ″harvested″ and b)sold. If you have any suggestions how to improve this further, go ahead, I know it's not perfect jet. Greetings from GermanyLlydia (talk) 18:49, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]