Talk:Steve Irwin/Archive 3

message: I don't know if you guys know about the edit to the crocodile page sometime yesterday?
It said something about Steve Irwin being dead and 72 virgin crocodiles being sacrificed.  It was vandalism of course, but creepy.  Weird that today we find out he's died too.
:What time was "sometime yesterday"? Because news of Steve's death was spread all over IRC and messenger when it was first reported at 2:32am last night CST G2 Wolf 20:23, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I reformatted the above message to get rid of the horizontal scrolling. Professor Ninja 21:10, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crocodile Page! 

message: This talk page isn't the place to leave tributes and other such what. If you are looking for that, see here:ABC tribute page to Steve Irwin.--HamedogTalk|@ 13:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've read Help:Talk page and I see nothing that says talk pages must not contain tributes.  --Tim1988 talk 13:22, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you stop at "inevitably"?  "Inevitably, there will arise situations in which collaborators on an article can benefit mutually from discussing the article' - thus we have talk pages, specifically for such discussion. Info for talk pages: There are two types of talk pages - the first one is standard talk pages which are used to discuss an article, while user talk pages are used to communicate with other users or leave them messages." — ceejayoz talk 13:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A tribute is discussion of the "Steve Irwin" article.  --Tim1988 talk 16:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: See above in the . It says "This is the talk page for discussing changes to the Steve Irwin article". A tribute isn't a change to the article. -- Longhair 13:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That isn't policy.  There is no policy that states a talk page can't include tributes. --Tim1988 talk 16:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I actually created a seperate tribute page, but that was deleted on the provisions that wikipedia does not host tributes. I actually used the same argument you have used. Any way, it clusters up the page.--HamedogTalk|@ 13:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: You have to sign up to post on the ABC tribute page. Suggest using the easier option of the SMH's or The Australian's Rafy 13:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tributes 

message: "He had been filming a segment for his daughter Bindi's upcoming television series."  His daughter is going to have her own television series?  If so, we should have an article for her. -anon
that's too bad he can't finish it...I think it would be cool if she had her own show. --Mitternacht90 16:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bindi

message: Then why don't you guys get rid of the damned "I SAY YOU HE DEEADDDDDD" heading near the bottom of the article.
God, now I know why so many people hate Wikipedia.
68.53.121.170 15:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We semi-protected the article to facilitate the removal of vandalism like that. If you refresh your page, you should find that that heading has gone. Before we semi-protected it, we were getting up to 7 or 8 edits to the article per minute, which made it extremely difficult to remove vandalism, because our edits conflicted with those who submitted their edits mere seconds before us. - Mark 16:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Enhance it with what? Pacific Coast Highway {blah • RIP Crocodile Hunter • WP:NYCS} 16:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  If the page is semi-protected... 

message: At least not today. As soon as this page is unprotected the vandals will start flowing in again faster than ever. Let's have some respect for this man and not let vandals ruin this entry. Jasonid 16:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree. How the hell can we do our jobs when those dumb vandals are messing it up? dposse 16:22, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: James is an administrator. If he wasn't he wouldn't be able to protect/unprotect pages. You can check the admin list here: WP:LA. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 17:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should not be unprotected. 

message: I am a new-registered user, so I am unable to edit this page. Could you please add be:Стыў Ірвін? Bacian 16:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Thanks for the link. Canderson7 (talk) 16:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please add InterWiki 

message: With all due respect to the dead subject, I am a little uncomfortable with the statement "Irwin's personality and outrageous antics in the series made him an international celebrity". While he certainly was a great guy, that doesn't really sound very neutral to me, sounds more like a point of view/opinion. Thoughts?--Badharlick 10:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know, "outrageous antics" doesn't sound very positive to me! pfctdayelise (translate?) 12:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Badharlick may have a point here, about the word if not the sentiment. "Outrageous" actually means immoderate, shocking, grossly cruel, immoral or offensive. Perhaps "eccentric" is more suited? Devious Viper 13:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But that's not the common usage of the word, which Wikipedia says we should use. Something tells me you'd be in favour of retaining the title "Red Army Faction" over a change to "Red Army Fraction" (which is the proper translation), so at the same time you should expect that the connotations of "outrageous" far outweigh its denotations. Professor Ninja 14:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not quite what I mean - what I'm saying is, it would seem to me to be hard to verify that Steve Irwin's personality made him famous along with his "antics". Even though it may be common knowledge, if there's no source and someone questions it's validity, it will have to be removed. --Badharlick 16:45, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV?

message: The admins in their wisdom unprotected the page again. Get ready for a new wave of vandalism. dposse 16:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pages linked to from the main page should not be protected, or if they are for just a little bit of time.  Wikipedia is a Wiki, so we want to make sure that our visitors are able to experience Wikipedia to its fullest  See m:Protected pages considered harmful.  JYolkowski // talk 17:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a special case. Actually look at the history of this page. I think we can make an exception. dposse 17:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's quite skimpy compared with the amounts of vandalism that a lot of current events articles have got in the past.  JYolkowski // talk 17:06, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite skimpy? Are you serious? Look at it a hour ago. It was being edited at least twice a minute. Oh, and this page was vandalised again not three minutes after you unprotected it. dposse 17:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look back at the history of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI about a year and a half ago.  And we managed to keep those unprotected the majority of the time they were linked to from the main page.  There's probably lots of other good examples of such pages as well.  JYolkowski // talk 17:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here comes the carp. Get your popups ready. Pacific Coast Highway {blah • RIP Crocodile Hunter • WP:NYCS} 17:23, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Very manageable, indeed. Pacific Coast Highway {blah • RIP Crocodile Hunter • WP:NYCS} 17:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Get ready... 

message: Semi Protection is more than fine for this article. Full Protection, although it will make sure no more pictures of dicks get on the article, is a bit overkill. dposse
Oh, and someone remove those penis pictures, what the hell is the connection with the article?
:No offence but are you an idiot? Does it really need explaining? It's just some fool pissing about.
:Those edits were to , not to the article. —Whomp t/c 17:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The pictures of cocks and no connection, other than idiots who think it's funny. If this page was semi protected in the first place, that would never have happened. dposse 17:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: They're fully aware of the fact that they'll get caught but simply don't care.  It's easy to just switch to another IP address once you're banned anyway. - 81.178.104.77 22:05, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full protection is in the extreme. 

message: This is most inappropriate; I realise that it is vandalism but someone with editor rights needs to remove it.   It is very likely that kids will be finding this page, as they try and read about their hero!
:It has been. Please clear out your cache. dposse 17:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you need to fully clear the page, press CTRL than F5. As that should make a full page refresh to check for a new version. --BC 18:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, pressing CTRL and the letter R works better. dposse 18:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please will someone remove the pornography from this page NOW? 

message: I noticed some idiot had slipped in something about a guy called "Mark Weaver" having been charged on "September 5th" (impossible of course) of "wilful murder". Someone cleaned it up before I did, but I think people should be vigilant of such atrocious behaviour on this page over the coming weeks. The last thing wikipedia needs, and more importantly, the last thing the Irwin family need, is juvenile idiots making light of such a tragic event.
Be glad your not looking at a website atricious enough I won't mention it. They're literally poking fun at Irwin for dying. I'm assuming the idiots are coming from there. Soxrock
::Hi there, the page has been locked once again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Irwin --BC 17:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wish to point something out to those folks earlier on Sept 3 US and again now that Australia is not in OUR timezone, so sometimes, their datelines will look like they are from the future. Please check timezones. UnseemlyWeasel 18:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as i know, the admins have the page semi-locked, thus meaning that only a few users are still able to edit the site. I also am not sure if the admins here are banning the vandal IP's either. --BC 18:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the article is now semi-protected IPs and new users simply can't edit it so can't vandalise it. However, generally, users (including IP addresses) that produce frequent vandalism are blocked from editing. The Land 18:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The article is currently semi-protected, meaning only established Wikipeda editors can alter it. A number of administrators are also keeping an eye on it, so we should have similar problems for a little while. It apparently takes a few minuts for old versions (eg vandalised versions) of the page to be deleted from all the Wikipedia servers, so you amy see an out-of-date page for several minutes yet. Regards, The Land 17:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Nevermind, you guys are too fast :) Aa35te 22:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: For example, in relation to his body's location in Cairns, why change this from The Australian to Spero News, when the Australian already said this? Somebody went citation-crazy in asking for cites (and I obliged in some respects and others did as well) the point that whoever put so many  references down ended up with Reference 22 cited a-e. Now, however, the article is pointlessly lengthened by excising certain of these citations, which just contributes to bloat. God, when there's a perfectly valid citation, could we please not expand the article from the single extra character used to subcite into an entirely new line? Professor Ninja 18:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why were certain reference/citations changed? 

message: From the header (or intro) I removed what is inarguably POV, weasel word, and duplication of material already found in article.  Examples follow:
This paragraph:
Through his vast exploits, carefree personality and seemingly endless knowledge of nature, Irwin created a distinct persona that for many was not only the face of the international conservationalist movement, but the last of the traditional Austrailian in the vein of national hero Paul Hogan. He also owned and operated the Australia Zoo at Beerwah in Queensland with friend William Rollo and his wife. He died after the barb of a stingray punctured his chest while he was filming a documentary segment for his daughter's show. .
Contains POV e.g. "vast exploits", etc weasel words (e.g.: Irwin created a distinct persona that for many was not only the face of the international conservationalist movement) and is a "tribute" which fairly gushes subjective partiality toward the subject (not that he wasn't a good guy, but judgement of character isn't the goal here, is it?), as the banner at the top of the page notes, is no "encyclopedic."
His death is also covered under a separate section.
This statement:
He was credited with re-energizing the so called "wildlife documentary" for television audiences who had long grown bored with the genre's typically stoic and staid manner.
is clearly POV, and the assertion of re-energizing the "wildlife documentary" is unsourced besides being untenable.  The Discovery was thriving long before Steven became famous.
This line clearly duplicates material already in the article and, thus, is redundant.
He also owned and operated the Australia Zoo at Beerwah in Queensland and fronted several conservation efforts. 
PainMan 18:10, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed POV, and duplication of material already found in article, etc 

message: There is a citation format error in the Death section. The first citation after the camera man analysis is ended with a <ref instead of a </ref>. Can someone please take care of it, it is the reason the rest of the section isn't displayed. --84.184.99.16 18:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I already fixed it. Professor Ninja 18:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation error 

message: I do not consider this photo any more offensive than other photos on wikipedia, including certain photos (Such as the rather infamous photo of the young vietnamese girl post napalm strike, or the equally infamous photo of the Nazi executing a jew with a rifle, or of the south vietnamese officer killing a VC agent). Seriously, if you can show those on wikipedia, you can show a simple barb, and the reason for it is that most people will be completely unfamiliar with this particular ray, or any ray for that matter, and that this particular cause of death is peculiar, unfamiliar, and rare. Professor Ninja 18:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I found it helpful; Iwas thinking that he died of poison from a small stinger, not that a huge stinger impaled his heart-- that's very different indeed. 65.190.42.103 18:23, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The image appears to be a copyright infringement. I reported it at WP:PUI. RexNL 18:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I couldn't visualize it. (finally remembered to login)Kuronue 18:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm trying to track down that particular Ray, PainMan. Hopefully I'll find an educational photo, blatantly free of use (contacting the museum is just too much of a hassle on labour day), so that we can be relieved of RexNL's pleasant demeanor. Professor Ninja 18:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh look, apparently you can't upload non-commercial images. Apparently very broad image licences now count as no image licence. Way to score, Wikipedia. Professor Ninja 18:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I admit what now? As far as I knew, the picture was released legitimately by the user (I wasn't the one who uploaded it). I just assumed good faith on the part of the guy who uploaded it. As for inappopriateness, I definitely have to disagree. Like I said, this image, for example (external linked just to save space): Execution of VC captures what could be highly inappropriate -- the exact moment of a man's death. In context, it's neither macabre nor inappropriate. Professor Ninja 19:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added photo of barb 

message: The references list is getting ridiculously long. Could people stop linking to every news article about his death on the Internet and stick to wire reports or Australian sources only? And learn to use <ref> and  or . I'm starting to get sick of cleaning up after lazy linkers. --   Netsnipe  ►  18:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Excellent, Netsnipe.  References, esp re: his death, should preferably be Australian media (accessible to anyone via web) since the wire service reports will doubtlessly be based upon them.
PainMan 18:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good idea 

message: It's becoming damned hard to clean up this mess.  I've run into so many attempts at vandalism and people obviously keeping the edit page open to block any further edits, that it approaches the farcical.
Out of perhaps fifty attempts, I succeeded only a handful of times.
Someone needs to step in.  Stuff like, "We love you Steve!  You will be missed" are clearly and completely inappropriate.  Somebody even tried to post "Crikey it got me!"!
Let's have some class!  What's next, pictures of his corpse?!?!
I'll let it go until tomorrow and then clean up whatever mess has resulted.
PainMan 18:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism, edit "conflicts", this is a bloody mess 

message: Hmm...it says that there are only 3 known cases, and then the article says 1 or 2. It then lists who and why, but why say 1 or 2 when it was 2?
Also, this part of it:
"I have never heard of an unprovoked attack from a stingray," Connell said. "Such attacks usually only happen when the ray is under severe stress," he said.
Isn't that a contradiction, because he obviously HAS heard of an unprovoked attack? PureLegend 18:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Source #28

message: Um, who is stainton? His quote is fine, but can someone please expand on who he is so it doesn't sound like everythings been copied and pasted from a news story? dposse 18:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stainton 

message: This picture should be allowed under the "Death" section as it shows the barb of a Stingray. LindaWarheads 18:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it is probably a copyright violation. See WP:PUI for more details. RexNL 18:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: This is an encyclopedia, we deal with facts and the truth, it should not be watered down. LindaWarheads 19:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: It is not copyrighted, so that one won't work.  It is an appropriate picture of a stingray barb, like the one that stung Irwin.  Until a better one comes along this one should be used.  Encyclopedia's are cold and detached.  Thank you LindaWarheads 19:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: It was a copyvio from . Do not upload this photo again. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Barb Picture

message: What I've just seen is not just vandalism, it's a mockery, gibe, jeer, profanation, call it as you like. Please, delete the picture that's on top of everything! I was not able to do it myself.
Gazibara 18:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The cock picture? Yeah, i bet he's being banned now. At least, i hope he is. dposse 18:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: That junk has been removed, thanks to whomever did the cleaning on it. :) --BC 18:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's pretty horrible, if you ask me. The guy dies and you put a penis on his page. 69.125.199.241 19:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism again 

message: Um, not everyone knows french. Let's keep only english words in the article, ok? dposse 19:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sobriquet, if that is what you're refering to, is actually a word in use in the English language, but it indeed sounded wrong there. Incidentally, do you understand how the reference system used here works? I don't, but would like to include the information that it was a bull ray somewhere. The relevant links can be found at the end of the section on how many people have been killed in Australia by rays. (contrary to the article, it looks like he was the 4th to me). Skittle 20:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not everyone knows french. 

message: "Caught on camera" in the 'Death' section links to "Snuff film". May have gone undetected. 84.71.49.172 19:32, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undetected vandalism? 

message: Did anyone noticed that before Steve Irwin died or before September 4th, this article only has about five or six foreign language articles, but as of today, it has 24 foreign articles. --67.2.148.214 19:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's more or less of people remembering that this guy existed. It's sad, but a major event spurs everyone's interest. Yanksox 19:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Foreign language articles

message: Shouldn't we mention his death in the header of the article? Something like a quick, one-sentence mention of the event at the end of the header, since it is currently important and we spend a lot of time talking about it in its own section down below. Mad Jack 19:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We've already mentioned that he's dead in the intro and the info box. dposse 19:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The intro needs to be considerably larger, including a mention of his death. It's fine to wait on that until all the details become clear, but the current one-sentence intro should not remain for long. savidan(talk) (e@) 20:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Death in header?

message: Is this article-worthy? Starks 20:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it is. Include a citation. dposse 20:32, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Probably not needed, but seconded. It will have to be removed or reworded after the fact, but it does belong. Professor Ninja 20:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, i would argue that it's just as notable as the quote from the Prime Minister. dposse 20:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animal Planet Tribute at 6PM EDT 

message: I heard on the FOX News Channel that The Crocodile Hunter was actually shooting a documentary on the ocean's friendliest animals; however on Wikipeida, I have notice that it says it was a documentary on the ocean's most dangerous animals.  Just wanted to mention this...Kyle Bandy 20:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And you actually believe Fox news? dposse 20:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep your left-wing, liberal taunts to yourself. SarahTeach 20:45, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep your personal attacks to yourself. dposse 20:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Buddy, it's a not a personal attack, it's a fact. Keep your politics out of Wikipedia. SarahTeach 20:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, first off, logically speaking, there's no reason why any political persuasion to could disbelieve Fox news. I know conservatives that don't trust Fox news because of their dogged use of hyperbole, but that's not the point. The point here is, don't be unecessarily quarrelsome... either of you. Dposse, he's just asking a question. SarahTeach, you sound like a chagrined school marm. Relax. Professor Ninja 20:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A little hypocritical, don't you think?  You chastise me for whatever reason, and then you insult me on the way out?  Nice. SarahTeach 20:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I criticized your demeanor. There's quite the gulf of difference, unless you think sounding like a vexed authority figure is a personal insult (which, by the way, is exactly how you came off). Regardless, drop it. There's no reason for you to get testy and there's no reason for Dposse to bite the hand of somebody asking a question. Everybody relax, enjoy. Reclaim the article from vandals. Professor Ninja 21:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text:  Zing, but not relevant. There's actually two filmings occuring, one concerning dangerous animals, and the other being for his daughter's show (his daughter being eight years old, I imagine it would be the friendly animals one). Mr. Irwin was taking a break from one to film the other, so it's not terribly inconsistent. I suppose, in effect, he was in the midst of producing both. Professor Ninja 20:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I have watched segments on Steve Irwin on MSNBC, CNN, Foxnews, and NBC. None have said it was "Ocean’s Friendliest" and all have said it was "Ocean’s Deadliest," so you either misheard or they happened to mispeak on that occasion. A quick look on google news confirms its "Ocean’s Deadliest."  ~Rangeley (talk) 22:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Documentary Mr. Irwin was Shooting When He Was Killed? 

message: I have no verifiable sources but I suspect that along with may Australian News Websites, that Australia Zoo's Website. This could be just be to protect the website or otherwise but it would not load up. I think this could be due to the amount of well wishers and so forth. Does anyone else have this problem and could it be definitely explained?
Also anyone with the proper sources create a proper varifiable section on this 'tribute' of the turtle MSN icon. I understand it was removed earlier due to it being unverifiable?--Oliver Davison 20:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there's a problem loading these pages, and several others. In searching for an example of a stingray for a free image, I found several tourism sites with Google using "great barrier reef stingray" and variations thereof that would not load but had recent caches. I imagine the server load for people looking at the news, and trying to look for information on these, has put an unecessary burden on the servers. Recall that on September 11th 2001, CNN was barely able to stay accessable with only a minor three paragraph breaking news text, as well as a single small image of the world trade center on fire and the image of the CNN logo. That was CNN's site. These are much smaller and the burder on them must be comparable. It's undoubtedly killing them. Professor Ninja 20:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australia Zoo Website 

message: I see the article states that what killed Steve Irwin was a specific ray, which narrows down the range, taxonomically speaking. Would it be possible to find a free image of a bull ray's barb for use in the article. I still stand by the idea that it is important and informative (And I swear to God not macabre) to illustrate just what it is that penetrated Mr. Irwin's chest. Professor Ninja 21:06, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure if it was actually a Bull Ray. Can you find a citation for that? I just wanna make sure we aren't messing up on that fact. dposse 21:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in The Australian, ref 23 in the article. Skittle 21:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah. Ok, then. dposse 21:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In fact a bull ray? 

message: The Animal Planet special, "Crocodiles and Controversy", is mentioned in the section dealing with his career (under the sub-section "Animal Planet"). It says "his son was in no danger of being eaten by the crocodile", despite the incident not being addressed until the "Controversy" subsection (under "Personal", IIRC). This should be rearranged so it doesn't refer inexplicably to information later in the article. -Juansmith 21:28, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy mentioned in Animal Planet section

message: This article is undergoing persistent vandalism. Given its high readership I strongly urge admins not to remove the semiprotection for several hours from now. Please be aware that because of hte sluggish perforamnce of wWikipeida servers vandalistic edits, including very graphic ones, are being propagated for some minutes after they are reverted. In any case please do not unprotect the move privilieges for this article for several hours. The Land 22:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Several admins have expressed this should be sprotected and so it's now. Please don't wheelwar. --  Drini 22:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to say I'm very disapointed to see wheel wars still going on after I last saw the page 10 hours ago.--Konstable 22:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with the semi-protection. three peni a minute is too much and the server lag is a significant factor here. pschemp | talk 22:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is this protection template constantly added and then removed?  It should stay there until the sad news of Irwin's death calms down. --GVOLTT 22:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Please leave it protected for the moment, the constant vandalism is even making it into the headlines -- Rach 23:20, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semiprotection 

message: The BBC website is consistently saying that the wound was the cause of death and not the sting. After all, the sting itself is rarely fatal, but the wound is something else. Just an FYI. --81.153.208.70 22:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cause of death

message: and only 98% of them were vandalism.  Damn wiki's been busy. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 23:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny LindaWarheads 23:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Over 1700 edits in less than 24 hours... 

message: See http://internal.greap.net/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/5311982.stm?ls - I can't make head or tail of it. 84.68.212.92 23:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not a BBC website, see the address.  I assume you are the person who created it !  LindaWarheads 23:45, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I'm not. Link was forwarded to me. Please don't make assumptions about me. WP:AGF. 84.68.212.92 00:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Looks like bullshit to me. dposse 23:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The article is completely fake. ~iNVERTED | Rob (Talk | Contribs) 23:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, has absolutely nothing to do with the BBC. Forbsey 23:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks fake. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Completely fake.  Go to the link above, minus everything after .net. http://internal.greap.net/  What's there: I like stuff and things. If you like stuff and things too find me on greap[at]greap[dot]net or Netgoffs IRC. --GVOLTT 23:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anyone know what this is about?