Talk:Indianapolis Zoo

message: Did some poking around and found user Jgagen had rewritten a large portion of this article in 07.  Got me interested because I think the entire article suffers from POV problems, so I Googled "Gagen Indianapolis Zoo" and found that a person named Judith L. Gagen is associated with the Zoo.  I've added the COI template.  -- JTHolla! 15:06, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I spent a bunch of time tonight going through it and deleting a ton of promotional fluff. In the end, I got rid of most of Jgagen's additions. --132 02:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: COI Tag

message: Hopefully this can get the ball rolling on any relevant discussion about the section.
I reverted the removal of the mishaps section. The edit summary for the removal stated the following: "Deleted section. This is an unreasonable calling-out of incidents which are unrelated and not uncommon in similar institutions throughout the world. Prejudicial grandstanding."
All three of the events are directly related the zoo. The truck incident is directly related because it was transporting critters from one zoo to another and the zoo used people who weren't properly licensed to transport them. The second point is directly related because it was a fire within the zoo. The third point is directly related because the sharks died within the zoo due to an error by employment. All three are clearly directly related to the zoo, rending the "unrelated" comment moot.
Now onto how common this is...well, what bearing does that have on this article? If similar incidents happen at other institutions and that information can be sourced, then please feel free to add it to those articles. What may or may not be on other articles has zero bearing on this article. Wikipedia is not perfect and never will be perfect. Just because other articles on institutions may be lacking similar information doesn't mean that information should be removed from here.
As for "prejudicial grandstanding"? That's a totally subjective point, does not assume good faith, and is entirely moot. The only way this comment could possibly hold up if is the information was unrelated (which it is related) and/or if it wasn't sourced (which it all is now).
This is not an "unreasonable calling-out of incidents". This is information about the zoo that, while somewhat negative, is directly related, can be sourced, and has been added over the years by several different editors (not myself). We don't remove negative information simply because it is negative. Please see WP:NPOV, which is an official policy on Wikipedia. By not including information on the truck, the fire, and the death, which can all be properly sourced, we push the POV to be overly biased to a "this zoo can do no wrong" view, which is factually inaccurate.
If you still feel the information should be removed, please use WP:POLICIES and WP:GUIDELINES to show why and gain a consensus before removing it again. Thank you. --132 14:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mishaps 

message: Substituted at 18:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Indianapolis Zoo. 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/20061016141632/http://www.indyzoo.com/content.aspx?cid=632 to http://www.indyzoo.com/content.aspx?cid=632
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) 08:20, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified