Talk:Travis (chimpanzee)

Harassment

Modified language that outright accused PETA of harassment to reflect that such harassment is alleged to be made by PETA members, but a representative for the group denies PETA involvement. Previous language was too definitive for something that may not be true, and two of the citations reference the first, making the statement -seem- more conclusive than it really is. 135.214.40.162 (talk) 03:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

In Popular Culture

Given that at least one major media controversy has occurred as an indirect result of Travis's attack (see Sean Delonas), is it worth at least a brief mention in this article?

absolutely, I noticed last night. I will add something --Bobak (talk) 18:12, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

There is no evidence Travis ever acted in any commercials. A recent article in "New York" magazine seems to indicate he didn't--most newspapers at the time stating his actor status were all copying off of one another. - Anonymous, 9:49, 11 February 2009

2007 Incident

There was a 2007 incident in which Travis gained access to the family automobile and may have bitten a police officer. It was mentioned briefly this week, and photos and video were shown on WFSB television.

Get us a solid citation off the web and we can work it in. --Bobak (talk) 19:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Abilities

"The chimpanzee had been domesticated and was toilet trained, able to open doors using keys, could dress himself, watered plants, was able to feed hay to his owner's horses, ate at a table with the rest of the family, drank wine from a stemmed glass, logged onto the computer to look at pictures, use the internet, watched television using a remote control, and brushed his teeth using a Water Pik.[3][2] On television, he enjoyed watching baseball.[6] Travis had also driven a car on several occasions" This is pure bullshit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.215.54.124 (talk) 07:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

One is a set of cited facts, from several sources, the other is an opinion by an anonymous IP address... hmm...--Bobak (talk) 15:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I realize this is another new anonymous IP here, but not only does this ring false, the Life article cited for Travis having allegedly "driven a car on several occasions" tells a story of a completely different chimp, "a female named Cappy." The Today website doesn't appear to mention anything about it.

...use the internet...driven a car on several occasions

I can imagine a chimp looking at pictures on the internet, but is that 'using'? Possibly Travis could steer a car, but is that 'driving'? WKP's leg is being pulled hard here. Centrepull (talk) 12:39, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

You have to remember that Travis was a very pampered,spoiled chimp treated in many was like his humans' son. He rode shotgun in their tow trucks and often as a passenger in a car with his parents; it's not a stretch to learn to turn the keys and drive like any teen does up and down Mom's driveway. Despite the image of chimps in the ad agency, they're NOT small animals once they reach sexual maturity; they're usually pushing 5 feet (150 cm) or more. I've read at least 1 non-wiki reference that said Travis not liked looking at the internet (pictures, obviously; he can't read) but also knew his favorite TV stations and knew what time his favorite shows were on and could play video games on the computer (something already shown in Chimp intelligence studies to be a real skill chimps develop in research situations). Scarletsmith (talk) 13:04, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Travis (chimpanzee).jpg

I think this picture, File:Travis (chimpanzee).jpg, should be used in this article. It shows Travis the chimp up on a filing capinet. I think it's allowed to be used by "fair use" because he is famous and so photograghers probably would't give a picture of him. TV and papers would pay them for the pictures.--Chuck (talk) 18:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Again, Chuck, you are not understanding our image use policy nor the nature of fair use. The picture should not be included (and should probably be deleted from the project entirely). --ZimZalaBim ^talk 18:30, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Image use policy is: Wikipedia wants free images because "fair use" is BS. If a newspaper wants another publication to rent its photos, the courts in a capitalist country would take the newspaper's side, because the newspapers are not supported by the government but by profits instead. Their profits supposedly pay for their food, shelter and clothing so they can't give away their pictures even if they wanted to. --Chuck (talk) 07:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I must confess, with no affectation of ignorance, that I fail to apprehend the meaning of your last two sentences. I imagine, though, that your objections are not to the application of our image use policy to the instant file, but, instead, to that policy generally, and probably to the Foundation licensing policy under which our project-specific EDP is promulgated. It is fine, to be sure, that one quarrels with the policies of en.wiki or the WMF (in various regards I, for one, do), or even with the laws of the United States that fundamentally prescribe the extent of copyright, but neither the talk page for this article nor the IfD for the photo is the proper venue for such discussion. Joe 22:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

External links

The external links I added follow Wikipedia:External links#What should be linked, item number 3, “Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons.” The links 1. inform researchers of the existance of those photos of Travis the Chimp, and 2. the links direct the reader to where the legal publisher of those photos is publishing them.--Chuck (talk) 05:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Please see WP:ELNEVER. WWGB (talk) 06:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't see the WP:ELNEVER problem (whether it is appropriate to link individually to the pictures where a link to the gallery would suffice and whether a link to a gallery of images of Travis is otherwise useful as an EL are editorial questions, ones I'm inclined to resolve against inclusion); the link isn't, AFAICT, to material that violates copyright, but, instead, to images that are owned by the site that publishes them, that of The Advocate (no different from our linking to an article that contains images the publishing newspaper has purchased or of which it controls the copyright). Joe 07:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Then how about WP:LINKFARM? WWGB (talk) 11:54, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

It would be much preferred to find a single link to an online gallery of photos, that multiple direct links to a newspaper's images (which, at least in my case, also resizes my browser window). --ZimZalaBim ^talk 13:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I looked for a gallery of them, but the The Advocate is just using them in the articles. Also, they don’t offer free license. They use their assets for income. -- Chuck (talk) 17:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

You Tube

Concerning User:WWGB's 21:01, 2 March 2009 edit, according to WP:ELYES, an external link such as this 19:57, 2 March 2009 "External links" edit should be included in the external links section. Also, I found no AP You Tube in the references. The was a CBS You Tube, but it was difficult to find because it's in the references. The Associated Press You Tube seems more appropriate. If in the "External links" section it would be found by readers more easily than something in a long list of references. --Chuck (talk) 22:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Travis the chimp.png

Concerning Revision as of 04:22, March 15, 2009, that "a free image of Travis could reasonably be used" is not true, since Wikimedia doesn't have one. --Chuck (talk) 21:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Also, the subject of the image and article is dead and Wikimedia doesn't have a free image to replace this image with. --Chuck (talk) 22:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Chuck, you need to get over your fixation with the ape and move on. Let him rest in peace. 203.220.10.226 (talk) 23:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Age at time of Travis' Birth?

It appears that Sandra was approximately 56 years old (based on 2009 - 1995 = 14 and 70 - 14 = 56) when she and Jerome purchased Travis.

I am unable to determine Jerome's from this article. Does anyone know it? 74.96.8.55 (talk) 11:59, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

bolder?

is this where you talk about the article? Cuase i think the slept with part should be bolder —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.246.168.5 (talk) 03:30, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Any particular reason why? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 03:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

"Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV) is a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view." That means we don't bold statements just to make a point. WWGB (talk) 03:39, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok i understand the neutral thing but the thing is this is odd as heck. maybe that is why he did it. should have some way to show this, the fact that he slept with that women has to be more important then the fact that he drank from a wine glass. why not bold it? And dont call me a vanadal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.246.168.5 (talk) 03:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Odd, yes. It's been speculated in non-WP sources that Travis, at age 14, may have been going through puberty and sexual frustration and the Xanax was not merely for Lyme Disease-induced depression. But that's not grounds for bolding the fact that she slept with her chimp. Scarletsmith (talk) 01:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

1996 incident

"1996 incident After the 2009 incident became an international news story, a woman who had lived in the same area as Travis claimed that in 1996 the chimpanzee had bitten her hand and tried to pull her into a vehicle as she greeted him. She claimed to have complained to the Herolds and to police.[18]"

Travis would have been 1 years old in 1996 since he was born in 1995 - and I don't think 1 year old chimpanzees can be dangerous. Also, the citation leads to a 404 page. 139.80.123.42 (talk) 05:49, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Someone repeatedly deleting references to Xanax

It is important information that Travis had been given Xanax prior to the attack, as the brutality of the attack was not typical of the behavior of a chimpanzee that was not under the influence of drugs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thoralor (talk • contribs) 10:40, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

The information is already in the Socialization section. It does not need to be repeated. WWGB (talk) 12:23, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Socialization

Like all wild animals, the chimpanzee could not be domesticated, but he was socialized.

This sentence doesn't make sense as the definition of domestication is the taming of a wild animal. Maybe it would be more correct to say: The chimpanzee was not domesticated, but was socialized. Or maybe the point is rather that domestication does not equal taming. Millberlin (talk) 15:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)