Talk:Man-eater

message: This entire article reads like it was written by lawyers defending maneating animals in court. 
Jarwulf (talk) 07:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Bears are now in the article. In passing, pandas are not bears.--DThomsen8 (talk) 01:08, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Pandas are too bears (Ursidae, but not Ursinae). Among extant bear species, they to form the "out group" i.e. all others are more closely related to the each other than to the panda. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:3453:7AF8:7F0:AFDF (talk) 17:59, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: The image :Image:Spotted-Devil.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The following images also have this problem:
*:      Image:Tigress-Jowlagiri.jpg
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:56, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Spotted-Devil.jpg

message: I can't figure out if man-eater is supposed to refer to a species or an individual.  I have a feeling the article is also confused about this.--24.85.68.231 (talk) 04:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basic Question 

message: Wasn't that just in the movies? And what about "species of bony fish"? 80.123.210.172 (talk) 18:20, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  African Army Ant? 

message: There are many well documented cases of individuals (Geoffrey Dahmer, Ed Gein, etc.) who have killed and eaten other humans. Not to mention places in New Guinea and elsewhere where cannibalism was practiced into the 19th century and possibly into the 20th century. --Weetoddid (talk) 07:03, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Man Himself 

message: Dogs have, in view of their ability to overpower people and their unfussy appetites for meat, the capacity to kill and eat people. Examples are to be found in Nazi concentration camps, in which guards partially starved dogs before setting them loose upon helpless prisoners then killed by the dogs and at least partially eaten by the dogs. At least one Nazi concentration camp guard, Irma Grese, was shown to have set dogs against live prisoners among other crimes against humanity. 
Rumors have it that Uday Hussein, son of the dictator Saddam Hussein, arranged for the secret police of Iraq to arrest a young woman who spurned his advances. The unfortunate woman was subjected to attack by half-starved dogs who killed and partially consumed her body.
Such are extreme circumstances more the culpability of humans of unusual cruelty than of dogs themselves. 
Dogs ordinarily have some respect for humans, but after extreme abuse (well-fed dogs, like other predators of similar ability, power, and size are as deadly as those of similar size if provoked) even they could attack humans as food. Feral dogs who often live on the brink of starvation and have no respect for humans, easily fit the criteria that make a big cat, hyena, bear, or alligator a potential man-eater.  Pbrower2a (talk) 20:06, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dogs -- under extreme circumstances 

message: I saw a special on National Geographic (I think) about hippopotamuses and their relation to humans in areas of Africa, and it was mentioned that recently they discovered that hippopotamuses will sometimes, though very rarely, eat an animal they kill, including humans. It even had eyewitness accounts from some scientist talking about how he watched a hippo eat his friend after it attacked their boat. I can't seem to find it via google though.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.106.235.18 (talk) 17:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hippopotamus 

message: why is the hammerhead not mentioned?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.101.160.159 (talk) 18:57, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shark Attack 

message: Shouldn't Paranha(s) be listed?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.97.39.161 (talk) 01:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piranha  

message: There is a documented case of an orca killing its trainer and partially eating it ( Tilikum (orca) ). Evidence suggests this was not an isolated incident and that this animal's behavior suggests specific aggression towards humans. Is this worth adding to the discussion?   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.80.196.3 (talk) 22:19, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Orca in captivity

message: If I understand this concept, the criteria is "an animal that deliberately hunts and/or attacks human beings as a food source." Polar Bears should be included in the subsection on Bears in this article. They, like Siberian Tigers, kill and eat anything they catch. The Red Queen (talk) 21:22, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criteria 

message: Remember -- motion pictures and fictional books cannot be used as sources for biological fact. "It happened in a movie" or "I read it in some book" is evidence of nothing except of the content of the feature film or the book. So if someone tries to use such a horror film as Them! as evidence that ants irradiated so that they can grow to giant size can kill and eat people, the example is reasonably denied. I may have no question that a giant preying mantis or tarantula similarly bloated would kill and eat a man, but insects and spiders of such size apparently do not and cannot exist. This effectively rule out ill-defined "sea serpents" of nautical lore or giant clams trapping a diver of diver lore, and even rules out the book or movie Jaws as a source that the Great White Shark is a man-eater (although the Great White Shark is a well-documented man-eater in acceptable sources for Wikipedia).  
Likewise, a film showing T. Rex as a hunter of humans imposes the absurdity of an anachronism even if T.Rex is one of the most imposing of predators ever. 
Prove otherwise and you have another creature to add to the list of documented man-eaters. Pbrower2a (talk) 21:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movies as 'evidence' 

message: Orcas are not fish as far as I know!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaticate (talk • contribs) 02:04, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fish 

message: Until I see a source I consider this section "original research" and will delete it.  
"Most of the great apes will generally avoid getting into contact with humans, though will attack if cornered and provoked. Of special note are baboons which are omnivorous and can often show little fear of humans – there have been cases of baboons attacking children and trying to steal infants. Chimpanzees are omnivorous too but far less violent, though they can be provoked, especially in groups. Gorillas are herbivores, but can be extremely aggressive and violent if they feel they are in danger, though they can usually be calmed by submissive behaviour. However, with the exception of incidents where baboons have attacked children, none of the omnivorous primates are known to see humans as food, as they usually hunt far smaller animals."
Source it or forget it.  
In any event the statement is ambiguous and even contradictory. Without doubt, other Great Apes -- chimpanzees, orangutans, baboons, and gorillas -- can kill humans, most likely in defense. So what? so could caribou which would never eat a human. The elements that make an animal a man-eater are that the animal kills humans deliberately and then eats the flesh in whole or part. "Deliberate" spares us of the scenario in which a domestic cat accidentally kills its master, runs out of cat food, and then starts to nibble on the corpse. Self-defense is not predation even if the animal defending itself uses tools of predation.
:http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0304/feature4/online_extra2.html Chrisrus (talk) 14:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primates other than humans 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Man-eater. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://news.aol.com/story/_a/aggressive-gator-kills-burglary-suspect/20071113224509990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20141006074142/http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/497370/20130807/canada-criminal-investigation-new-brunswick-python-african.htm to http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/497370/20130807/canada-criminal-investigation-new-brunswick-python-african.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:58, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article mixes animal attacks and man-eating. It should only discuss man-eating; animal attacks should be a separate article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1010:B11F:6543:5102:FA3C:4794:D79 (talk) 22:42, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Attack versus Eating

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Man-eater. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927173051/http://www.nina.no/archive/nina/Publikasjoner/oppdragsmelding/NINA-OM731.pdf to http://www.nina.no/archive/nina/Publikasjoner/oppdragsmelding/NINA-OM731.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:28, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I couldn't help but notice that the first picture in the article, which depicts a sign warning individuals of lion attacks, is placed next to the section on tigers. Either the picture should be moved to the section on lions or it should be removed entirely in favor of another picture that depicts a tiger. I was going to be bold and make the edit, but I thought it would be best to say something on the talk page to get feedback. Crazymantis91 (talk) 06:34, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Picture 

message: The very first sentence states that Man-eater is a colloquial term for an individual animal that preys on humans as a pattern of hunting behavior. However most of the article documents random, probably isolated cases. Yes there are a few cases of pythons swallowing humans, but is it a "pattern of hunting behavior"? And it's the same with most of the species mentioned here, each species has a few documented cases where certain individual(s) attacked and possibly ate humans, as a single event, not a pattern of behavior. --Nomad (talk) 14:23, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, the term as such is applied to individual animals that have overcome their natural shyness and aversion to approaching humans (either because of hunger or an initial opportunity kill) and have now adopted a pattern of predatory behaviour that includes humans. There are no vertebrate species that generally prey on humans. If we can agree on this, then the article lists species in which such a conversion has been observed. That said, with tigers it is fairly easy to establish that a community is dealing with a single animal that causes trouble, whereas this is much harder with reptiles. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:3453:7AF8:7F0:AFDF (talk) 17:50, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most of this article is offtopic 

message: English, people. It is the claim that the snake poses a real threat that is legitimate. The threat itself is not (and in any case the snake would not care either way). 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:3453:7AF8:7F0:AFDF (talk) 17:45, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "a threat that is legitimate" 

message: Maneater 116.206.15.26 (talk) 07:22, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  E 

message: Your cited source is mistaken.  In an essay by Montaigne discussing how tenuous life is and how there are so many ways to die, he mentions Aeschylus facetiously, by claiming that an eagle carrying a tortoise in its talons, dropped it and it fell on the head of this great Ancient Greek poet and playwright.  If you read this essay I think that you will find that Aeschylus was just interjection a bit of humor.  Montaigne certainly did not say that Aeschylus was eaten by a bird. 58.10.154.20 (talk) 10:28, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aeschylus and Montaigne 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. Man-eater is both precise and used by the sources, so the page will stay where it is at. While a gender-neutral title would be preferable in accordance with MOS:GNL, none of sufficient precision was proposed in the RM. No prejudice against a new RM if an equally precise gender-neutral term, supported by reliable sources, can be identified. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Man-eater →  – The AfD for this article failed, so there is clearly some amount of people who believe this article should exist in some capacity. However, the title remains very misleading to outright false. I have tried to come up with the best possible name for it given the article's true scope, which does not imply the listed animals typically, or even commonly eat/attack people. Once moved, Man-eater should be redirected to Maneater.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Animals has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Concur - This is a much better name. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Comment. Doesn't that name change change the scope. The first paragraph limits the scope and it doesn't include all animal attacks. —  Jts1882 | talk  15:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Inclusion criteria can be specified to animal attacks that are notable, as with many lists with inclusion criteria.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Can also be List of animals involved in fatal animal attacks, but that seems to be somewhat arbitrary. There isn't an article on "fatal animal attacks".  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose, Man-eater is much more precise, as being killed by an animal is not the same as being eaten by an animal. Many people have been killed by animals, but not eaten by them. Davidgoodheart (talk) 18:59, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Oppose Animal attacks are, by definition, attacks by animals on other living things. Therefore, if we were to enumerate every animal implicated in one of these attacks, the list would number in the trillions. To put it another way, innumerable animals have been involved in these kinds of incidents. Since we are not unique, we cannot assume that an attack involves humans. Plus not all animal attacks result in death. Deers ought to be included on this list as well. Man-eaters—as the name implies—eat people. They exclusively contain carnivores; the term "eat" is crucial here because they consume human flesh. I think I've covered all the ground. 20 upper (talk) 19:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind the fact that WP:GENDER recommends to avoid "Man to stand for persons in general regardless of gender", "man-eater" implies that something exclusively preys on humans. This is pretty much never the case except for possibly a few outlier examples. The word has no real place in a scientific encyclopedia besides use in fantasy fiction.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 30 January 2024