This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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. Organizations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

There are about 4-5 links which are just to different newspapers covering the same AJP story. Few of them really back up the key information in the sentences they reference. London prophet ( talk) 15:02, 4 September 2017 (UTC) reply

There were many issues with this article including: - Use of multiple local papers covering the same story to create impression of more sources - Use of very emotive language - Information of campaigns that lack any notability - this article should not be a history of every action taken by a small animal rights group - Discussion of use of FOI to "unveil" information that appears (and has done for a long time) freely on institutional websites. Further investigations suggests most of the these FOI requests were answered as links back to the respective websites. - Broken links I've tried to address this issue and slim this down into an article that respects the notability criteria and addresses key actions by the AJP. London prophet ( talk) 14:40, 7 February 2018 (UTC) reply