Talk:Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Hong Kong)

October 2006

It is a good organization!0101miniho06 03:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

how to do our mid-term project

Hi, The latest issue of the Pawprint should be issue 65 from 1st of November.But i dunno how to put the hyperlink on the page,is there anyone can help? Thz Kate hi there,

well i think the quantity is not what matters, the most importantly is the quality of everything we write! but of course if we can search for some more relative information of SPCA then it'd be really good. but the fact is, we should organize what we have here now. and, most importantly, i think we didnt do enough discussion here! =P maybe we should really discuss a bit before we add any new things into it? and to the other groupmates, beside me, lucia and stella, if you guys see what we write here, we are looking forward to discuss with you here about our page!0101kennis06 16:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC) hi , have you watched other groups' page? I think our content is not enough , and we may need to add some more picture to make the page looks better. 0101luciawang06 10:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

dear all, hi ..i am agree with both of you. is it that we can send a personal message to tiffin and to talk to her about this? if the three of us think that part is not appropriate, then this request shouldn't be too unreasonable. 0101kennis06 04:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I think tiffin should read what we said on this page, but it seems tiffin do not come here .0101luciawang06 10:50, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear all, I think the adoption rule and expenses sections may not be appropriate to post here as it tends to be an advertisement for the organisation. It may violates the principles of the Neutral point of view and wikipedia. Should we eliminate these sections?0101stella06 10:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I think it is post by 0101tiffin06, is s better she delete them herself. is it so rude if we just delete it, ?0101luciawang06 02:39, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Believing that an article has an owner is a common mistake people make on Wikipedia. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. See Wikipedia:Ownership of articles and Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages . --Geniac 00:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

dearest groupmates, hi there, just know that we are going to do SPCA(愛護動物協會)， how to do it ? what are the main elements to include? 0101luciawang06 14:39, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear all, I have just uploaded the logo of the org to the page. how many parts should we divided the page into? 0101kennis06 15:44, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I think right now ppl just write things that are from the offical website, maybe later, when there is enough info, we can organise it better0101luciawang06 11:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear all, is it that now we should kind of select the information we put on the page. cuz i think its a bit flooded. 147.8.195.92 08:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

oops, forgot to sign in ...the last message was by me 0101kennis06 08:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

dear all, i feel the same way with kennis, it seems that we are just copying , what 0101luciawang06 10:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)is the point? people can go to the offical website and read it anyway. i think we should decide what info is important to quote here. 0101luciawang06 13:05, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

November 2006

dear all, after attening the tutorial today , i think our page still needs a lot of improvement, i think we should maybe find other resources other than the offical website. i found out that, in fact, some people really do not trust the society , they had a negative feeling towards spca, should we put those negative news in our page?0101luciawang06 06:50, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, criticisms should be included on any topic if they exist; see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Also, see my comment above; please remember that this is not "your page"; this is a publicly editable article on Wikipedia. --Geniac 16:01, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

yup. i am very much agree. so what else should we include here? i have already dig out some news articles about the society, do u think we need some negative voice as well? i know this is not a 'homepage' that is promoting the society. if we include negative voices then we have to decide what and how much should we put in. (so as to be neutral and wont turn out to be against the society.) i think the direction we are going is really pointless and time wasting. i mean keep summarizing the homepage. argh i am just worried about the time lucia!0101kennis06 16:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

hi, kennis, i agree with you, i think we should can put some of the negative reports in our news part. and do you think we need the "adoption "part? ppl can see it right from the website anyway , shall we just delete it ?

o, yes, in the tutorial , John says we should "follow the money " and find out how effective the society is , i think we can work on that 2 parts too.

Time flys, 大家加油！0101luciawang06 16:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

hi

i agree with kennis. I think our contents are pretty enough. what we need is a more clear structure which makes it more like a wikipedia entry. Until this stage, we'd better discuss more in improving the quality of it, rather than squeezing new trivials to the contents. 0101stella06 17:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

hi stella, what do you suggest? i suggest we should delete the adoption part first, it so looks like "copy " work from the webpage.0101luciawang06 05:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Please add comments underneath the comment you are replying to; it makes it easier for everybody to follow the conversation. Thank you. --Geniac 18:42, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

so, lucia and stella, you mean just delete it straight away without informing anyone? since our other groupmates don't show up too often here...i wonder if they know the discussion part?0101kennis06 17:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC

i think they know gua, however, i think we can do nothing but wait a little longer 0101luciawang06 17:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Urgent

hi guys, i just put on some pics , but i think they are too big , i do't know how to edit it smaller, can everyone help?0101luciawang06 06:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Dear all, I am tiffin... Sorry that i really don't know this discussion part until now... and I apologize for not coming... If you guys think the adoption part is not suitable here, then you may delete it. But I think the tone of the financial part was not very good. It seem to said the SPCA is not a good organisation or lied.

hi tiffin , in fact, they did say that they mainly rely on donations to run, maybe they say that to get ppl to donate, but, in the report, they actually earned a lot from other aspects. thank you for your advices anyway , i will see what i can do to make it more neutural . 0101luciawang06 09:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

To all, it maybe a bit late to realise this point, but we can still change it. Do you guys realise sometimes we use "SPCA", sometimes "the SPCA" and sometimes "SPCA(HK)" ? Would it be better if the name is consistance?--0101tiffin06 12:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

hi, finally, we have reached to the end, hope we can get good marks 0101luciawang06 15:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

To tiffin, u are right. The official abbreviation should be The SPCA(HK). We'd better altar all the wrong ones to make it more consistant. 0101stella06 14:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi there, I realize there's a Chinese article uploaded as a reference to the session of "controversial issue". Do we really need that article as here,wikipedia, is an English-medium platform. Would it be better to make it as a related article rather than pasting it a little bit awkwardly?0101stella06

Hi. to stella, i checked the last yr s students work , they have cited chinese resourses too, because i think i want to show some local pet lovers' opinions,0101luciawang06 15:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

well i think the chinese article is alright, as we have linked a number of related chinese articles in the external link part. this is a hk organization i think we shouldnt just limit the source in english only. 0101kennis06 15:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

hi, finaly, we reach the end. what do you guys think? hopfully we will get good marks la, thanks a lot that you edit the pics for me, i am quite stupid when dealing with computer. Good Luck ! 0101luciawang06 16:03, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

my dog has an excident by a car so I don't now what must I do plz help me

😭😭 41.116.71.93 (talk) 13:10, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Updates

I'm doing a few edits. Noticed that the first sentence of the article is a little busy-looking with the name of the organization, and then (SPCA (HK)) and then the Chinese name. I think it's good enough to leave out the short form (SPCA (HK)) so will delete that part. It will be more readable.

This sentence early on has a bad link: "The SPCA (HK) is a registered Hong Kong charity whose remit is not only actively to pursue the cause of animal welfare primarily in Hong Kong but also in the rest of China and the region." I found that it does have an outreach program to China and will link that somewhere.

I'm going to remove the notability warning (reproduced here):

as it's clear the organization is notable, it just needs a few more sources.

The long list of programs relating to animal welfare is now in several sections. I'm going to consolidate it into one section. The section about Euthanasia I'm going to put in a separate section called Controversy. Also found a recent link about a protest that was held.

The section now called "Recent Action" I'm going to call "Campaigns". I put references to some of the existing campaigns, and added one about shark fin soup that has received a lot of attention worldwide.

Canadianknowledgelover (talk) 02:58, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

References