This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Monty the meerkat article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Zoo, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to zoos, aquaria, and aviaries 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.ZooWikipedia:WikiProject ZooTemplate:WikiProject ZooZoo articles
A fact from Monty the meerkat appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 15 March 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
The image is admittedly (and pretty obviously) a Photoshop - am I right in thinking that this isn't appropriate for Wikipedia? If the image were circulated when the hoax was believed, it would have significance, but it's only a couple weeks old. 64.238.164.98 (talk) 16:22, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A photoshop and a bad one to boot: the camera is mirror-image. If this is one of the ones used in the hoax, what idiot was taken by it? If it isn't, why is it in the article?
--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 16:30, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The image was made to make the article funnier because it is a funny article, but it was removed now to satisfy some boring :-) readers.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:48, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
