Talk:Greg Avery

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Names[edit]

Sorry LZ, I didn't see you were editing, and I've just done it again, though you were probably still editing. I'll stay away from it for a bit, so you have space.

Do we have a reliable source for Avery also being known as Greg Jennings and Greg Harrison? SlimVirgin (talk) 18:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the exact same thing. The Daily Mail article contains reference to that. Maybe we should move that reference inline as a note instead?-Localzuk(talk) 18:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, good idea. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The quote regarding support for the SPEAK campaign should be removed unless it can be referenced.

Where have you been? Living in a bubble? He has spoken on at least 3 marches that I have attended - here is a (low quality) source [1]. I will try and dig out some other sources - although, they will most likely all be relatively low quality, as the individual speakers on marches are rarely mentioned in the media.-Localzuk(talk) 17:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

so much of this is wrong, i know greg and almost everything on this page is wrong, cant wait for google knol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.51.222 (talk) 21:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this quote is accurate: "In October 2008, during Nicholson's trial, the court heard that Avery and seven other defendants carried out acts of aggression, and made threats of violence, on behalf of SHAC but in the name of the Animal Liberation Front or Animal Rights Militia."

Although it is what is in the linked Guardian article, other media reports don't say that the defendants are personally accused of carrying out these actions. The charge is conspiracy to blackmail, meaning that they are accused of being in an implied conspiracy with other people, possibly unknown to them, although they themselves didn't undertake direct action.

I think this may be deliberate manipulation of the facts by the Guardian for propaganda purposes.

Here are some other links that seem more factual: 

http://www.chesterstandard.co.uk/latest-north-west-news/Chemical-firm-director-speaks-of.4577020.jp
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/3161389/Father-accused-of-being-a-paedophile-by-animal-rights-activists.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1070469/Father-lived-fear-animal-rights-extremists-sent-letters-neighbours-falsely-branding-paedophile.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7659744.stm
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6cb6e7b6-9407-11dd-b277-0000779fd18c.html?nclick_check=1
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4902105.ece

Lurch23 (talk) 17:56, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this potentially libelous and prejudicial to a running court case, as well? Just because a prosecutor alleges something, doesn't mean it is true. I could equally well say how the court heard that they were completely innocent, because the defence lawyer said so. Though I think the paraphrasing of what was said in court is factually incorrect anyway. Gregg has been under police surveillance for years, so if he was involved in nocturnal direct action, they would have caught him long ago, and the court case would be presenting specific allegations, not general ones of a vague conspiracy. Lurch23 (talk) 01:34, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why has Rockpocket removed the world "controversial" from the description of the company? They say: "Circular argument. It is the action of his campaign that generates the controversy, the company is no more inherently controversial than any other commercial testing lab". That is irrelevant - the company is controversial, it is a fact. It doesn't matter whether it is down to its own action or the actions of others. You could even argue that it is inherently more controversial than other companies, due to the actions of its employees punching beagles, etc. that were filmed in the various undercover exposés. Lurch23 (talk) 18:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Calling HLS "controversial" is a bit like calling evolution pr psychiatry "controversial". A noisy minority of people set out to make a fuss; their goal is being able to generate controversy and thus use that to further their goals. Its self perpetuating.
You say it is a "fact". Isn't it also a "fact" the SHAC and the other campaigns Avery started are controversial, violent and criminal? Shall we include that in the lead also? Its perfectly sufficient to describe what Avery does without using such value laden adjectives, the reader can themselves decide how "controversial" or not his, or HLS', actions are. See also Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms. Rockpocket 18:21, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

rockpocket is knee-deep in vivisection which is why he wants "controversial" removed. The reason HLS is controversial (and make no mistake it is) is because they got busted punching dogs in the face. Now rockpocket is butchering mice down at the sanger institute so he probably doesn't think that that counts as "controversial". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.200.63.90 (talk) 00:09, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That salon article is hilarious and also erroneous. Avery was not trained as a tailor but some fool has said it once so it must be a fact! More wikinonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.194.41.109 (talk) 19:05, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Greg Avery. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 18:44, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Greg Avery. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 23:45, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

name is spelled wrong[edit]

It's so typical of fake news wikipedia that you haven't even spelled his name correctly. what a joke — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.173.25 (talk) 15:06, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Greg_Avery&oldid=1199221281"