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

Primates Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Primates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Primates 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.PrimatesWikipedia:WikiProject PrimatesTemplate:WikiProject PrimatesPrimate Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Africa This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

These articles show a lot of overlap and should probably be merged. Rotational (talk) 14:33, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disagree... the articles should be written more clearly, using modern sources written after the species were split apart. Please stop using older sources, exacerbating the problem. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:27, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this article call the species the vervet monkey if it is about the grivet. Whoever wrote this article is deranged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.175.248 (talk) 21:09, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That was because someone inexplicably had changed "Grivet" to "Vervet" throughout this article. This has now been reverted, but see also talk of WikiProject Primates here (the address will change when that comment in archieved. At that point you'll have to look for the comment called "Grivet and Vervet Monkey" in the archieve of the talk page of WikiProject Primates). 62.107.193.8 (talk) 05:12, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]