Talk:Steve Irwin/Archive 7

message: I was thinking it may be time to remove the current event tag.  Only details of the funeral and the coronial inquest will change now, and the latter won't happen for weeks at least.  I'm looking for a concensus.  Robert Brockway 14:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's still on the wikipedia front page as "in the news" so I don't think the tag should come off yet. --SiobhanHansa 14:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: No, I think it is still a current event. It was still the number one lead headline news feature on tonight's news in Australia. And 3 (out of 3) of the news outlets I just checked still have it in number two or three spot of their front page. Also, there is still new related news changes, such as the information about Steve's website being "hijacked" and donation money stolen. The public reaction in Australia, which is like nothing I've ever seen before in this country, is keeping it as a current event for now.  Sarah Ewart (Talk) 14:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: When did his site get hacked? The article doesn't say anything about it. Ilikefood 15:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Event tag 

message: Added fifth archive. Apologies if I've removed anyone's active discussions, please feel free to move them back if you still want to discuss them.--▫Bad▫harlick♠ 18:36, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive 5

message: I'm in favor of totally protecting this page so that it can be free of vandalism which is happening at least once every second, even though it is SPROTECT. There doesn't seem to be too much new information in the present and I don't think it would do more damage being opened to edits than to close it for a short time. --Zimbabweed 18:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A huge chuck of information was deleted at this edit please somehow merge or revert. --Zimbabweed 18:40, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Get a life people. You cannot convey your anger towards that ray by vandalising. On the 4th of Sept I even saw a picture of a pen!s. Keep Wikipedia sacred! This is not your private property to be abused! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahul.acm (talk • contribs) 
18:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Y'kno what's funny? It takes a man's death for his page to be expanded. Pacific Coast Highway {blah • RIP Crocodile Hunter • WP:NYCS} 21:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  UGH! Rampant vandalism! 

message: Just wondering if this could be added to the article. Apparently it is possible that the video taken when Steve died may be shown since his family believes that is what he would have wanted. 
vDub 18:57, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I beg to differ.  Even if the footage leaks I won't watch it.  It would feel like exploiting a good man's tragic demise. Durova 20:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I differ again. Steve Irwin has said in the past that the thing that would bother him most about dying in action would be 'if nobody caught it on film'. I beleive we even used to have that quote in this article somewhere, until the wave of recent edits apparently buried it. Does anyone have the source so we can restore it to somewhere appropriate? I think it's a very interesting position for a person to take, and tells us something unique about Steve. Dissembly 00:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Irwin's attitude would be, "roll it". He might say it would serve as a cautionary tale to not take wild animals too lightly... which, arguably, he did. He knew crocs, but maybe he didn't know stingrays all that well. It might be gut-wrenching for the family, though. Wahkeenah 00:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Here's a link to an article which mentions the quote and interview Dissembly mentioned above: http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/World/2006/09/06/1806812-sun.html Lux 22:15, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: You should have been here yesterday. It was crazy. dposse 19:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: huh? dposse 19:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: There's no video of his death on CNN.com. It's just a video of the events that took place. If Irwin's death video ever does come out, I'm positive it won't be on CNN or anyother mainstream news site. Reynoldsrapture 21:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently I was misled. Sorry. Wahkeenah 23:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I think there are plenty of ways to have Steve's legacy benefit from his untimely passing, like his Worldlife Warriors foundation, without having to confront people with a, according to his manager, very shocking piece of footage. I think it will serve his legacy much better if the footage is destroyed, like John Stainton pleads for. Kluner.net 04:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The majority of the American public will not find a barb through the heart particularly shocking. We're the land of Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill. 128.62.100.252 17:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are fictional stories where no one is actually harmed. This is real. Believe it or not, there is a difference. Wahkeenah 17:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  And it's not just an American public that will get exposed to it. If this footage airs, you can bet on it that it will be on youtube, google video, and all the rest in a matter of seconds. Imagine the pain that would cause for his family and friends, and most of all his kids, if 20 years from now they still get confronted with video's of Steve dying. It would be insensitive bordering on barbaric. Kluner.net 00:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footage to be shown? 

message: I'm a nursing student, and based on medical knowledge and commentary about the sting ray's barb, it might have been possible that Steve could have survived if he didn't pull the barb out. First person accounts have him conscious up until the moment he yanked the barb out, and then within seconds passing out and dieing. I've seen footage of emergency room patients arriving with daggers pulsating in their hearts, and the only reason they survive is because the surgeons wait until the last possible moment to remove them. The dagger ironically acts as a barrier against catastrophic blood loss, which may well have been what ultimately killed Irwin. I'm sure it was such an instinctive reaction that he probably didn't realize what he was doing. This is just an opinion, and he might have died either way due to toxin injection, or based on the damage to his left ventricle, which is the chamber of the heart responsible for delivering blood to the body. Reynoldsrapture 19:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The barb pierced his heart. If the poison didn't get him, the hole in his heart would have. dposse 19:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Is that your medical opinion, or just a guess? No offense, but it is possible to survive a number of heart injuries if the victim is cared for in time. This may or may not have been the case with Irwin. We'll have to wait for the full coronor's report. Reynoldsrapture 19:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The barb pierced his heart. No one can survive that. And i agree, the coronors report will be very helpful. dposse 19:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Where are you getting your information Dposse? I'm willing to bet you're right, that a person probably couldn't survive a barb to the heart. But back up you're statement with some factual evidence. This is Wikipedia, and facts matter here more than opinion. Reynoldsrapture 19:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The "non-survivable injuries" may have been in part to Steve pulling the barb out- my whole point. But enough arguing... I digress. The sad truth is Steve is gone, and the world has lost an icon and hero to many people. Reynoldsrapture 20:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Very true. dposse 20:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text:  Hello. I've looked into this question, and I believe his Aorta was pierced very, very badly. I'm no medical expert in any sense, but I think that finishes most people off. Mikeblackburn 22:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: One other point he wasnt within 5 minute of a hospital with surgical teams. Gnangarra 01:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: What is the point of asking whether or not he would have survived, he is dead. Wikipedia is not a speculation blog, there are plenty of those, so please refrain from it. If you want to add it to the article then I guess it would be fine to discuss, but at this point we do not know if he even pulled the barb out. My opinion on the matter is he would not have survived no matter what he did. The barb is coated with a venom that supposedly can cause arrythmia and affect the heart and it also is serrated. By ripping it out those serrated edges did massive damage to his body. However, because the barb was in his heart, leaving it in may only have prolonged his life by minutes and would have caused extreme pain from the venom and the wound. A stingray expert on CNN said leaving the stinger in causes more damage than taking it out (the venom is not as weak as many have stated). The great kawa 02:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What is the point, you ask? This is an encyclopedia. That's the point. This is yet another terribly childish occurrence of Wikipedians biting experts on the subject matter. Do not do that. Reynoldsrapture was making a valid claim; there is evidence that people with severe injuries to the chest may survive if the lethal object, such as a knife, is left inside until the surgeons get their hands on it. Steve pulled out the barb; this might have caused further injury. That isn't original research, it's putting things into context. And even if it is original research, then at least it's something to look out for when reading sources for the development of this article! It's ridiculous that you're wiping Reynoldsrapture's arguments off of the table with uneducated assumptions. He (or she) may or may not be right. He's definitely not wrong until proven wrong. —msikma <user_talk:msikma> 21:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Whether he could have survived or not is not clear fact, and obviously then can not be added to the article because it will be taken as POV. However, since this is the talk page, i think that we could get a medical professional to give us their opinion. If anyone here is a heart surgeon, please answer.
This is a trolling discussion its an irrelevant question Steve Irwin died and that further discussion can only be original research and as such not something that could be added to the article. Gnangarra 15:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Um, actually no; if someone finds an article citing a medical expert (doctor/surgeon/whatever) saying this, then "further discussion" may not be original research. But really, people must have forgotten the fact that the tail is not a loose object, it's attached to the stingray. If Irwin didn't pull out the barb, the stingray would. — LazyEditor (talk|contribs) 16:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: User Gnangarra is being a "nanny". However, this section is all speculation, because (as far as I know) the autopsy report has not been issued, so we don't know precisely what killed him, and thus can't possibly know whether prompt action would have saved him. Wahkeenah 17:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Please be civil and do not lash out at other members msikma. I did not lash out at Reynoldsrapture, but was simply stating that speculation on Wikipedia is unnceccesary if it is not to be put into the article, however, calling me and my comments uneducated and childish is very uncivil and  quite frankly I am offended. You have a right to disagree with my opinion, but stating it in such a way can be seen as mean. I have no intention of arguing with a serious member of Wikipedia, so please respect other people on Wikipedia here, including me, as I have respect for other members of Wikipedia. The great kawa 01:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could Irwin have survived? 

message: There was a dispute on the main article (with notes) over which type of english to use (honor or honours). I saw the new changes from honor and while to honour and whilst so I changed it back to the old version. What is the proper usage (british, austrialian, american, etc.) for this article?--I already forgot 19:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: you shouldn't have.was it so har for you to discuss this before making any changes. doesn't matter anyway since the words were changed backThe 89 guy 19:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No is was not hard at all, just as its not hard to RV the change. :)--I already forgot 19:57, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: From what i saw yesterday, everyone pretty much came to an agreement that Australian spelling is best since this is an Australian person. dposse 19:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been many inappropriate changes with false information since yesterday so I started going through the article and making changes to the last decent edits. I don’t care if it’s Australian or not, long as it fits with the rest of the article.--I already forgot 19:57, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What "inappropriate changes with false information" are you talking about? dposse 20:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Irwin moved with his parents as a child to Queensland in 1962" was the first one I noticed. I then saw the number of broadcasting stations changed from 120 to 130. I was going to continue and go through the sources and look for others when the English edit discussion started so I have since stopped as it looks like a few editors have been watching it closely so I will watch for vandals instead. --I already forgot 20:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: This is about the differences in the english language, not the other languages. dposse 20:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: And - as a fact - there are differences in swiss-related articles. since swiss folks don't use the eszett-umlaut ("ß") but double-s ("ss") instead. and there are some more differnces with austrian-related articles. --Addicted 21:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Yep. That's what we agreed on yesterday. dposse 20:49, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I scanned the talk pages and did not see that discussion. --I already forgot 21:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, Aussie English is pretty fine. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Done. Switched the remaining whiles to whilst. --GVOLTT 23:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  What? While and whilst are slightly different, Australia uses both in slightly different contexts, don't just change them all. Sad mouse 05:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: English

message: Apparently, an internet campaign has begun to get users of MSN messenger to put turtles in their display names in memory of Steve Irwin. Almost everyone I know has done it, so perhaps it's worth a mention?--Agent Aquamarine 21:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope; this was brought up a few times before and since it was just some internet campaign, it is not a good idea to include it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not particularly notable; something similar happened in response to Cecilia Zhang's death. --Madchester 02:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it is a good indication of the worldwide reaction to his death.  I'm about 50/50 on whether or not to include it.  It isn't so much of a campaign, just some way that people can show their admiration and respect for this great man.  On the other hand, it could seem a bit inappropriate.--Shaliron 09:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can find a secondary source for it. Fine, include it. Otherwise it has no place on wikipedia. ViridaeTalk 14:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm personally neutral on it. If someone wants to find the proper source material, be my guest, but I'm just reporting it.--Agent Aquamarine 00:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Turtles

message: "Some reports have claimed that after the incident, Irwin was shown on tape pulling the barb out, before losing consciousness, but this was both confirmed and denied by his colleague John Stainton in different sources."
huh? How can that both be true? I understand that we don't have the full story yet, that the shock is still setting in, but still....How can we have such contradictory infomation in this article? I don't want it to be removed, just clearified.dposse 21:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I suggested that earlier.  This is what Peter Weist said after viewing the video, which may be what you're thinking of: "The footage shows him swimming in the water, the ray stopped and turned and that was it. There was no blood in the water, it was not that obvoius, something happened with this animal that made it rear and he was at the wrong postion at the wrong time and if it hit him anywhere else we would not be talking about a fatality." . Zagalejo 22:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Another possible interpretation might be that Steve instinctively grabbed at his chest as the ray's tail spine went in.  The spine probably came out quite readily all by itself, almost as soon as it had gone in — it was part of the ray's body, after all, and the fish wasn't about to stay around — but it might easily have appeared as if Steve had pulled it out, especially if his arms went limp soon after going to his chest.  This is just my personal speculation, of course; I haven't seen the film and don't expect to.  Richwales 06:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mr. Stainton. 

message: Was Irwin a naturalist as described in the first line? This implies a scientist, which he wasn't. "Wildlife expert" already captures what we are trying to say. There should be a term here to describe his hands-on activities. "Animal-handler"?--Jack Upland 23:01, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the American Heritage Dictionary, a naturalist is s "One versed in natural history, especially in zoology or botany" which I believe he qualifies as. Their is no requirement he be a scientist in any official sense to be a naturalist. --Cab88 23:47, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Naturalist is quite appropriate (historically, there have been many uncredentialed naturalists). I removed the wording that he was a "wildlife expert" because someone else felt the need to qualify that as "despite no degree" or something like that. If he wasn't qualified, calling him an expert is out of place (what body vetted him? you see). --Dhartung | Talk 05:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Scientist is still true in the abstract sense of the word I think, since Steve was an expert on quite a few subjects, and even discovered a new species of turtle, I think the term easily applies to him. The term scientist does not merely fall to those of us with an university degree in something. Though I might be slightly biased in that opinion. Kluner.net 04:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Though the term "naturalist" is arguably correct, it is misleading. Irwin's claim to fame was his hands-on experience and practical knowledge. He was particularly interested in crocodiles and other dangerous animals.  Therefore I think "wildlife expert" is more accuate.--Jack Upland 10:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Since when do you need a degree to be an expert? Steve was undeniably an expert in his field.--EDH 10:34, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naturalist? 

message: I'm sure many people here whose primary language is English know what a television program is, am I correct? There are just way too many links on here... only uncommon words should be linked (Great Barrier Reef, Stingray, etc), and only a few times in the article. We don't need to see Stingray linked many times when they're in very close proximity to eachother. Abby724 02:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer liberal linking, but multiple links to the same item are unneeded. I don't count this as an urgent problem, though. They just come back, as so many people are editing, many of them inexperienced. When the article stabilizes a thorough cleanup will be warranted. --Dhartung | Talk 05:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need urgent need of link cleanup... 

message: I just added <rm site link> and RIPSteve.com links to the External Links section of the article, but they were reverted. I don't want to be a stubborn jerk about including them, so if someone else thinks they need to be included, could you add them? --Krapitino 02:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They are spam links, do not include them again. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I visited them before I added them, and they look legit(?) --Krapitino 02:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think they are spam links, but the question is whether they are warranted in the encyclopedia article. The donation one, for example, I don't think should be there, and the memorial one doesn't really have any new information. —Centrx→talk • 04:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The donation site is just a mirror of a page from the Australia Zoo site which is already linked to  in the article. Link guidelines can be found at WP:EL. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 04:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  To-do list links reverted? 

message: Here's a tip, although it says the site is hard to reach at times, try using firefox, and opening up to 20 tabs.  Eventually you will get in.
64.121.39.12 03:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's brilliant. You're hitting the server 20 times to get it once. This could be why it's overwhelmed. --Dhartung | Talk 05:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crocodile Hunter.com 

message: As far as I can see, there is no "See also" list in this article. What about a list of other people that does something similar for a living, for instance Rob Bredl, the Barefoot Bushman? 193.217.192.178 05:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, suggest some more people/things and I'll create the section. Maybe some organisations he was part of have an article? --▫Bad▫harlick♠ 09:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "See also"

message: The Nine Network is airing a tribute show about Steve Irwin as I am writing this. WHY HAS IT BEEN REMOVED TWICE WITH A REFERENCE TO THE TV GUIDE? Hohohob 09:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay firstly, please don't shout. Secondly, you say it's been removed twice - did you revert the change or was that someone else? Could you please quote the section that was removed?--▫Bad▫harlick♠ 10:00, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes unfortunately you've got to add that sort of thing after it's happened, since wikipedia isn't a TV guide. ▫Bad▫harlick♠ 10:21, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia details future events all the time. This is just moronic, like you people have no concept of the precedents already set. There's already a stupid discussion as to whether to use American english in an article about an Australian in an encyclopaedia that's set a standard to cater to all dialects, especially by writing articles in the dialect peculiar to the subject being written about. Now there's a debate that Wikipedia can't feature planned future events? We have to wait until it happens just because it's a television show? Bull. That's no metric to gauge noteworthiness by (especially since this is television we're talking about), but there's been a long precedent of changing information as it occurs. You guys better scurry over to the 2010 Winter Olympics page and delete everything there since it hasn't happened yet. Double time because it might soon be updated with the broadcast carriers once all the contracts are hammered out, and we'd hate for Wikipedia to both report on something that hasn't happened yet and be a TV guide. Professor Ninja 10:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please be more civil, calling people or discussions moronic is not helpful. Please see: Wikipedia is not a directory. --▫Bad▫harlick♠ 11:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read more carefully. I was referring to neither the discussion nor a person moronic. And from the "not a directory spiel: Directories, directory entries, TV/Radio Guides, or a resource for conducting business. For example, an article on a radio station generally shouldn't list upcoming events, current promotions, phone numbers, schedules etc. (although mention of major events or promotions may be acceptable). Really. Please read more carefully. Oh, and look, from just a few paragraphs down: Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Hmm. So including something we know is going to happen and which is notable because of the context (you may notice a rather large section under the heading "death" called "reaction") is apparently what wikipedia "is not". And people wonder why I just get more and more sarcastic. Professor Ninja 18:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Channel Nine tribute show. 

message: It appears that the species has not yet been identified. It is highly unlikely that it was short-tail stingray (Dasyatis brevicaudata) as they are not found north of Maroochydore. It has been referred to as a "bull ray" but there are many species referred to informally as "bull rays". I'm removing references and links to specific species until more info emerges. Nurg 11:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had thought of changing the links that read "Bull Ray" to "Short-Tail Stingray" for clarity. Please don't completely remove all references and links though, they do cite their sources. I'm reverting your changes for now. --▫Bad▫harlick♠ 11:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The first ref does not cite a source (if it does, kindly repeat it here). The ref to "bull ray" is cited but could refer to any number of species. If there is a citation to a specific species of bull ray, pls repeat it here, because I don't see it. thanks. Nurg 12:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My apologies, I was convinced it did. The main problem is, in a situation like this, there are lots of very lengthy news articles, and sometimes someone will see something then add it to the article, but forget to cite, leaving everyone else to trawl the news for citations. It is my experience that it is best to ask for citations rather than to remove it completely, because the person who added it may come forward and provide those citations. While that's going on, you should attempt to discuss it on the talk page. If you reach a consensus that it's not stated anywhere or not reliably stated, then I think it's safe to remove it.--▫Bad▫harlick♠ 12:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Species of stingray 

message: Page was getting a little large again so I've archived most of it - it's still a bit large so more may need to be moved over to archive 6, which I think may be a bit small at the moment. If I've accidentally removed any active conversations, I apologise, please feel free to move yours back.--▫Bad▫harlick♠ 11:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive 6

message: Not sure if anyone else has seen this, but four Irwin-related titles are currently in the Top 50 selling DVDs on Amazon.com, which is pretty amazing imo.
* The Crocodile Hunter (Steve's Story/Most Dangerous Adventures/Greatest Crocodile Captures)  #20
* The Crocodile Hunter - Collision Course #23
* The Crocodile Hunter - Wildest Home Videos/Big Croc Diaries #28
* Crocodile Hunter's Croc Files (Volume 1) - #41
May not be notable enough to add to the article, but maybe this is: around 55 donations are being made every 10 minuets (to Wildlife Warrior)  ..Thesauce 17:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Surge in support

message: Could somebody please explain why Bob said no to the State Funeral, as it is, it doesnt really say much. Please use the quote where he explains why: 'Steve is an ordinay bloke..etc. I think it is important. Thanks in advance :). Thesauce 17:05, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the exact one I was talking about The state funeral would be refused because he is an ordinary guy, he is just an ordinary bloke and he wants to be remembered as an ordinary bloke. Thesauce 17:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: All I know so far, from CNN, is that Steve's father did indeed say no state funeral because he was a "common bloke." But yes, that quote will be useful in the article. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: State funeral

message: There are about 50 refs for this article which makes me wonder if it is in the correct format. The amount of detail reads like a news article and that many refs just sort of boggles my mind, on my particular pcs resolution it takes up more than a screen. Is this method of reporting sustainable, is there TOO much info? JayKeaton 17:15, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There may be too much info, but I think the tidying should be reserved for in a couple of weeks time. There is so much editing going on rigt now, so much to add, with a lot of people having different ideas about what should be in/out. I guess any rationale editing will have to take place at least once things are calm enough to take the lock off. Thesauce 17:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs

message: Also curious is that steveirwin.com doesn't seem to acknowledge his death yet JayKeaton 17:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, yes, it does and has done so for at least a couple fo days. Click on the large box, in the middle of the page, that says something like "Click here to view a tribute to Steve Irwin" and you will get a separate tribute page written by the Australia Zoo staff. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 18:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I see, that box is meant to work hand in hand with the months old text content on the main page of steveirwin.com JayKeaton 18:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: www.SteveIrwin.com

message: I think someone should make a cool looking template for Steve/Terri Irwin related articles. Could include links to both people, tv shows, docos, film and Australia Zoo. Thesauce 17:40, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Template?

message: Does anyone know the latest edit counts? How much has it gone up from his death? I bet alot.--Richard 21:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit count? 

message: I went to the Steve Irwin page (which was redlinked) and saw "JIMBO WALES USED MIND RAYS TO KILL STEVE IRWIN!!! F*** YOU, WIKIPEDIA!!!" Who unprotected the page? It was pretty obvious that somebody would vandalize the page. Just wanted to know. Cheers! The RSJ - SPEAK 21:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It automatically unprotects when deleted. It was deleted to remove vandalism in edit summaries, but the vandalsim and everyone trying to revert it was causing such a jam I couldn't properly fix the page. So the fuck yous are going to be in the edit sumamries for a while. sorry. pschemp | talk 21:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No need to apoligize, I just wanted to know. Good job trying to unvandalize the article! Cheers! 206.81.151.68 01:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, forgot to sign in... Well, cheers! The RSJ - SPEAK 01:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who Unprotected the Page? 

message: Keep this page locked.  Earlier I had to remove two pictures of a penis from the "Animal Planet" section, just to find the JUMBO WALES crap inserted by several different usernames moments later.
: duh. see above. pschemp | talk 21:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm afraid we're going to have to keep this article under close surveilance / and locked for some time to come. Such a shame. Kluner.net 00:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This vandalism is out of control. Since Irwin's death on Labor Day, I had to bust some punk and goth kids sent by Jeff Hardy & Bam Margera for vandalizing this page (AND deleting the WHOLE talk page--I have got to stop talking like Robert Goren and Elliot Stabler!). I also reported the culprit vandal (with the talk page) to Can't sleep, clown will eat me, an administrator. Turns out the same guy had been blocked on 5 September 2006, and somehow he got past the security system to vandalize some more. Keep a close eye out for them. This is where the vandalism is coming from. --D.F. Williams 16:20, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: I removed the statement re: A Current Affair. What do you mean Greer again stated his death was due to occupational hazards. When did she put it exactly like that first. Are you speaking euphemistically or of an excuse or 'explanation' Greer made for her attack. If so then please change your edit to report on exactly what Greer said or an accurate paraphrasing of same. AntonioBu 22:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree for its removal on principle that her opinion should not be given undue weight, as per NPOV policy. Ansell 22:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that the media has reported it extensively, to the point where The Australian published John Birmingham, who said that "[l]ess a harridan than a poorly sketched caricature of a harridan, she would be easy to dismiss as some unwashed and wretched bag lady who had somehow stumbled on the opinion pages of The Guardian, were it not for the fact that this feral hag does actually speak for a signficant minority." (Ouch! this is now my all time favourite put down), it might be worthwhile adding more material. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Germaine Greer 

message: Fox News reported just now that the tape, after examination by the police, will be destroyed. I'm sure. Wahkeenah 23:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. We'll be seeing links from ogrish.com in a day or two, mark my words. --Guinnog 23:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah....Let's wait until other news sources pick that up. dposse 23:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: News reports I have read indicate that friends of Steve want the tape destroyed after the police are through with it. There have also been reports that Steve had expressed to his work colleges, and perhaps his wife, that if he were to be killed by an animal while being filmed, that the footage should be shown on TV. Finally, I have read that the actual decision of what will happen with the tape will be left to his wife Terri. Sysrpl 00:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please cite! If it is proven that Steve Irwin did in fact want footage of himself being killed by an animal broadcast, it will avert a mistake that could never be undone! If the tape is destroyed, that's it, there is NO going back!Canberra User 01:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

text: uhhh...no.   --GVOLTT 00:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

text: lol!!! - Ta bu shi da yu 13:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The tape

message: At some point earlier today this article appeared as a new article which I tagged for speedy deletion. I just assumed my eysight was bad and it was a variant spelling. It was then deleted by someone and had to be re-created. How could this happen?
From the new article log:
2006-09-06T17:35:27 ‎Steve Irwin (hist) ‎[47,946 bytes] ‎Winblee (Talk | contribs) 
--ArmadilloFromHell 01:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was deleted to fix vandalsim in the edit summaries. This isn't a big deal except that people unfamilar with that panicked. If people could have held off the valiant vandal fighting for one minute, I might have been able to restore it properly. as is it, the fuck yous will just have to wait. pschemp | talk 01:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The edit summary is what the edit summary is. It's better to preserve the history of edits than to try to throw out the entire history to deal with some vandalism. If it were really that bad, there's probably an administrative tool to deal with it. Otherwise, yes, it's unsavory and impolite, but unfortunately, there are people out there who are that way. —C.Fred (talk) 02:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh yeah, the administrative tool is selective restoration, and in worse cases, oversight. Its done all the time. How do you think we deal with people who post personal info in edit summaries? It doesn't throw out the whole history by any means. But honestly, that debate is not the subject of this article talk page. pschemp | talk 02:19, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

text: In future I would caution against speedy tagging things you are not totally sure about. Ansell 02:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article deletion

message: A question about this section:
:Some reports have claimed that immediately after being stabbed, Irwin pulled the barb out before losing consciousness a short time later. Irwin's colleague John Stainton originally confirmed this account,[39][40] but he later denied it in an interview on CNN.[41]
My understanding is that Stainton started this rumor (perhaps unintentionally) after describing the video to the media. ("It shows that Steve came over the top of the ray and the tail came up, and spiked him here (in the chest), and he pulled it out and the next minute he's gone.”)  I'm not aware of any earlier stories saying that Irwin pulled out the barb; were there any? If not, then you can't say Stainton confirmed the account, because that suggests the story was already floating around. Zagalejo 02:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is actually a very large contradiction by the guy, but he is the only one who seems to have spoken on the event. It is actually really strange that he was adamant that he didn't want to talk to CNN, although the story originated with his comments to media early on. Particularly worrying is the fact that he told CNN that he had not watched the video and did not want to. He was lying to someone because he made the CNN after the initial interviews with the rest of the media. Ansell 02:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I read on the Sidney newssite that he had in fact pulled the barb out on his own, and it sounded to me like they were stating fact. My point is that whether it happened or not, the damage has already been done. He also said that he had in fact seen the video, as believed prior to the CNN comment, but as soon as Queensland police were done with it, he wanted it destroyed. Just thought it pertained to the topic discussed. -ExNoctem 20:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More on the barb-pulling business

message: crocodilehunter.com is no longer in service.  The working link is now crocodilehunter.com.au
So, if possible, can someone change it on the main Steve_Irwin page?
64.121.39.12 03:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website Address 

message: I think for that when you lose a good friend and a colleague for whom you care for, your mind is only naturally bound to some shock and to think and to speak mistakes when being intimidated with lots of questions www.geocities.com/berniethomas68 03:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say his whole contribution is way past immediate shock. Why would you be so adamant that you had never seen the tape to CNN if you were able to describe it in detail earlier to every other news agency. Shock doesn't account for that. Ansell 03:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Steve Irwin / Stainton

message: As I understand it Steve and Terri (and possibly his Dad) STILL own Austrailia Zoo.  Just because Steve has died shouldn't have removed the others from ownership of the Zoo.  I don't know anything about Australian inheiritance rights I admit but the entry could at least say they OWN and operate it.  I have read that the family intends to keep the Zoo open and running as it is a huge tourist attraction and of course, wildlife park.
:his dad is no longer living. I meant his mother. That's what happens when you edit too early in the morning. pschemp | talk 12:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  wtf? Bob Irwin is very much alive. ShaunES 12:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure is. Was on the tv here today talking about the funeral arrangements actually. Here's a story. Irwins mother (who shared the same birthday as Steve btw) has passed on though. -- Longhair 12:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ownership of Australia Zoo 

message: While browsing some of the other language versions (roughly 40 so far!), I came across the Danish version claiming that he is a supporter or the Liberal party, which seems to be derived from an earlier version of the English article saying that. The misinformation has been fixed here, but not yet in the Danish version.
Please ensure that any claims made in an article are verified by a reliable source. Thanks, Andjam 12:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is true, Irwin very much supported John Howard, but he had equal praise for former opposition Labour leader Simon Crean. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation of misinformation 

message: There should be a memorial template or userbox or at least some way for people to show their respect. Ilikefood 15:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No there shouldn't be. That's not the purpose of an encyclopedia. pschemp | talk 18:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  WP is lots of things that a traditional encyclopedia is not.  I actually don't care either way about the idea of a memorial box. Robert Brockway 18:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also note: Wikipedia is not a link farm. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 18:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Memorial UserBox/Template 

message: I know this is technically an aesthetic issue, but it's my impression that the main photograph gives the impression of Steve Irwin gangster rapping, holding up "west side". I know, its clear that he's in the middle of a particularly expressive demonstration, but perhaps eventually it could be replaced with something portraying Steve a little differently. There are so many good photos of Irwin holding a dangerous animal or posing in a press release. Does anyone find this to be true, or is my aesthetic sense worthless? -- Jeremy Bright  19:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And none of those are free. They are copyrighted. This on is released under GFDL and is free for anyone to use, therefore it is preferred. pschemp | talk 20:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New Main Photo of Steve?

message: The article's header (lead) should definitely be expanded to summarize the whole enormous text that has been added in the past few days. Mad Jack 19:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:LEAD, which is policy, requires that articles have lead sections commensurate with their overall size and contain enough information to fully understand the subject. I've written a couple of extra paragraphs for that but they keep getting deleted. If anybody expects this article to reach GA or FA, somebody else is going to have to write that. --Dhartung | Talk 23:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, exactly, not sure why this keeps getting deleted. This could easily get GA otherwise. Mad Jack 03:34, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Header

message: I removed this, but it was replaced. I think it should go again. The content on that site is basically TV advertising, a fan site and some flash movies featuring Steve. I'm left wondering where "Steve's work" is represented there, as I see only graphic designer stuff. Surely the Australia Zoo link is much more representative of Steve's work, and we aren't here to build a linkfarm after all. One good link (Australia Zoo) should be enough to treat Steve encyclopedically. -- cmhTC 20:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is plenty more there to see than just advertising (advertising performed by Irwin himself) and fan site stuff. The site in question isn’t a site create by fans, it is a site created by the company who employed Irwin....It’s his website in a sense. If you follow the links you will see there is much more content than just flash movies (flash of Irwin) and TV advertising. I agree that it’s not a link directory but links to his direct work should be added. If anything, the tv.com link should be removed.--I already forgot 20:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also notice that in the flash intro irwin says "Welcome to my fan site"(page revolves the flash animation so you have to refresh the page to see all the different flash).--I already forgot 20:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animal Planet external link 

message: A quote by Steve Irwin on what he wanted to be remembered for was removed. I would have thought this summary statement of his whole life's goal would have merited inclusion. If others agree, can they please make the edit instead of me? I'm sure the people on this talk page have much more experience with how best to include it. Perhaps there should be a "Quotes" section? After all, the fact he was so quotable was often commented on in the media also.
Here was the quote:
In episode one of the Crocodile Hunter series ("Steve's Story"), Irwin is quoted as emphatically stating:   
    
 
youcantryreachingme 01:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Here's a link to that video.  Your quote was slightly wrong, but thats ok. Just fix it and add the video link as a citation. By the way, i think the "If we can get people to care about wildlife" quote is probably better.dposse 02:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irwin quote on what he wanted to be remembered for 

message: "He was described after his death by the CEO of RSPCA Queensland as a "modern-day Noah", and British naturalist David Bellamy lauded his skills as a natural historian and media performer.[16]"
Shouldn't that be down in the Reaction subsection? dposse 19:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "after his death"... 

message: This was the Larry King interview that he did with Steve after his "Baby and the Croc" incident. It has some very nice quotes and infomation in it. Can we try to work it into the article? dposse 20:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone? dposse 02:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Larry King transcript. 

message: I found a better pic on flickr, but its CC deed says it can't be used for commercial purposes. Is Wikipedia technicaly commercial? The pic depicts Irwin as he is most remembered. See it and you'll know what I mean. (The medium size one would be best to upload, it looks the best.) Picture on Flickr:   Well, I guess we'll have sort of a mini-vote to see what everyone thinks. Can we use it, or not? Voting will last until Sunday, Sept. 10, 2006; at 0:00 UTC. aido2002 04:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better Pic 

message: Before this indicent, the steve irwin article could of been called a stub ;o 71.135.48.70 04:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What a person's death will do with a article 

message: There should be an online memorial site listed under the external links. What does everyone think of the popular memorial page at The Eternal Portal  .
I'll leave it up to those with authority to add if they deem appropiate.
:No; we have three examples of the online memorials here, we do not need anymore. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative online memorial site 

message: I have emailed the media address for Australia Zoo to request permission for a free-licensed image of Steve that we can use on the article. I will keep you all posted. -- cmhTC 05:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contacted Australia Zoo for a better photo 

message: Peter Broke has died to day, and that article links to Steve Irwin. Perhaps this could link there? Two Aussie icons dying in the same week.--HamedogTalk|@ 08:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See the Peter Brock talk page. Consensus there developed into a removal of the reference due to it only being incidental. If there was a cause for the phenomena then it may be relevant. Ansell 08:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking to [[Peter Brock]] 

message: Let's lessen the # of references. 68! --Woohookitty(meow) 09:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Up to 70. --Woohookitty(meow) 10:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Here's a thought 

message: The article says that Having grown up in Essendon, Irwin was a fan of the Essendon Bombers, an Australian rules football club in the Australian Football League.[6] Irwin took part in an Australian Rules football promotion in Los Angeles as part of "Australia Week" in early 2006.[7].
Although this is referenced, I find it hard to believe that Steve was a big AFL fan. And I think the only reason he took part in the event in G'Day LA is because AFL is a native sport. From what I have read, Steve played rugby league for a Caloundra team, and was always involved in State of Origin/Broncos promotions as well as appearing on the Footy (Rugby league) show numerous times. Growign up in Nth QLD, I find it hard to believe that he is a bif AFL fan and until I read this wikipedia article, I had never seen him have anything to do with AFL.
Now, Im not saying we should integrate any rugby league stuff into the text, I'm just wondering whether we really need all these props to football (any code). There are three links to AFL artiles in one sentance. Regardless of whether he liked AFL/League/Rugby, its not really important, and people shouldnt be using the article to prop up their favourite football code. Hrhchambers 12:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: After reading the cited source, I found the entry to be misleading and POV after the source did not make any mention of Irwin being a fan, only the assumption that Irwin was a fan because he lived there as a child. I deleted the entry  but it was later re-added citing source that read like it was taken directly from wikipedia. Since a source was cited the second time (actually stating he was a fan), I left it alone and moved it to a new location . --I already forgot 12:32, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Football

message: *Suncorp Stadium has been named as a possible memorial service venue (52,000 seater stadium)
*International Khaki Day
*Calls for a permanent shrine
*Lots more info is needed on the scientific research he did/funded
Also, I think the comments about Greer's comments are not 50/50. There is a whole paragraph about Clive's (pro) comments...what about the other side of the debate? Panelists/radio/etc have called her "venomous", "poisonous" and said stuff like immigration should tell her to piss off if she ever came back to Australia. I can easily find adequate soucres to back that up as well. Im just saying, if there is going to be comments about Greer's comment, we should represent the for/against in an equal manner. I know the article is not locked anymore, but my internet is too slow, and I tried editing before, and was caught inan edit conflict. So yer :). If anyone is keen to edit some more info in for me, please do. The Courier Mail website will have all the sources needed for those dot points. Peace.  Hrhchambers 12:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More info for article