Jump to content

Talk:Incidents at SeaWorld parks/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

The whale deserves its own page

After three deaths, the whale should get its own page. Maurreen (talk) 09:26, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I think the orca fails WP:PERPETRATOR guidelines. Shadowjams (talk) 01:36, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
A lot of that seems to be motivated by BLP concerns, which do not apply to an orca. -- Avenue (talk) 01:49, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Further, "The motivation for the crime or the execution of the crime is unusual." Maurreen (talk) 17:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, considering that the whale is neither human nor a criminal, I don't see how WP:PERPETRATOR applies at all. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:23, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Somebody made the article on March 1, but I had missed it. Maurreen (talk) 18:30, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Incidentally, I am of the belief that Brancheau should be mentioned there on a permanent basis: we generally include the names of a killer's victims (if they are public knowledge) in the killer's article. In this article, which is about a lot of unrelated incidents, not all of which are lethal, the names of the victims have a degree less relevance. However, while the story (and the name of the victim(s)) are actively in the news, it is reasonable to include the names here.--Father Goose (talk) 21:02, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Accordingly, I have redirected Dawn Brancheau there.--Father Goose (talk) 21:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
As I have stated previously - no issue with the victim's name appearing on a page that is dedicated to the incident. If the incident is notable enough to have it's own page, then feel free to name drop. If that is a page that is dedicated to the incident, then Father Goose has my support in his actions.SpikeJones (talk) 23:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
That's fine with me. At least the redirect will make sense no matter the eventual conclusion here. Gigs (talk) 04:22, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Actually, no it's not fine with me. It seems we have the same two editors censoring her name over there as well. Gigs (talk) 04:23, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Again, the includes outnumber the excludes in the RfC above, so putting the name in should be fine. Who keeps removing it? Cla68 (talk) 04:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
In addition to outnumbering them, on the merits of the case, our argument is stronger: The issue is whether the name is "relevant to the content." Nearly ever source uses her name. So in the judgment of almost every WP:RS, the name is relevant. Therefore it belongs in the entry. --Nbauman (talk) 17:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Summary of Orca-related articles

Thought this would be helpful to indicate some of the different articles that may need to be updated whenever an Orca incident occurs or new information about an existing incident comes to light:

Hope this helps. SpikeJones (talk) 04:16, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

1999 Death

"On July 6, 1999, a 27-year-old man was found floating naked in the pool of the killer whale named Tilikum. The man had died of hypothermia[16]. He had visited SeaWorld the previous day, stayed after the park closed, and evaded security to enter the Orca tank.[17] Investigators determined that the man, either before or after death, had been bitten by Tilikum."

Citations 16 & 17 link to articles that report on the February 24, 2010 incident. Also, there is no citation for the last claim that the man had been bitten.

--Sonicboom90187 (talk) 06:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

They will be removed, thanks for catching it. --A3RO (mailbox) 16:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Plagiarism

Actually, this was not plagiarism, because it credits the source. WP:PLAGIARISM "Plagiarism is the incorporation of someone else's work without providing adequate credit." --Nbauman (talk) 20:10, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, please see this section. The information has been retained, as has been the source. Please also note that I said "inadvertent" ... I don't believe that was your intent, but the text was very close to the original source, something highly discouraged by WP:COPYPASTE, even if sourced. --McDoobAU93 22:32, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

SeaWorld Orlando last?

Why is SeaWorld Orlando, the park with the most serious incidents -- deaths caused by an exhibition animal -- put at the end? I would think that deaths caused by animals are the most noteworthy, and so should be at the beginning. --Nbauman (talk) 20:17, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Easy ... parks are listed in alphabetical name order, just as they are in just about every other theme park incident summary article. We don't list by body count, so to speak, as that would be based on the opinion of a given editor. Alphabetical is the most fair. --McDoobAU93 22:37, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, but WP:WEIGHT requires us to give them prominence in proportion to the prominence given by WP:RS. The orca deaths at SeaWorld got far more prominence in WP:RS than the incident at Aquatica, for example. The killing by an orca is far more prominent than the deaths from natural causes. Why shouldn't we give the incidents prominence to reflect the prominence in WP:RS? --Nbauman (talk) 01:42, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
The problem is, WP:WEIGHT doesn't apply in this case since there are no competing viewpoints on the subject of this particular summary article ... either an incident occurred or it didn't. If it did, and it's supported by reliable sources, it goes in this article, which for all intents and purposes is a list. That list is ordered alphabetically by name of park, then incidents are labeled alphabetically based on the attraction involved, then chronologically if multiple incidents involving the same attraction are listed. This is the most neutral way to present this subject, and prevents POV-pushing. --McDoobAU93 02:02, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Bird collision

No idea if this is notable enough, or verifiable, but a few years back I was right near the front of the line at Griffon in BG Williamsburg, and the train rolled into the station with a lady in the front screaming her head off. A bird had collided with the train, died on impact, and then remained on her lap because of the g-forces. They had to call over managers and safety people, because apparently animal conrol isn't part of operator training. After about half an hour, they reopened the ride and went back to business as usual, even using the seat the bird died on. I can check old calendars and try and find the date if needed. Should I bother? Is this notable?

Billytrousers (talk) 16:35, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

It would be notable if the story was reported in a local newspaper or by a local TV station. A first-hand report is not verifiable and would also contain original research. Any chance you can find a news story on this, since it's very similar to Fabio's incident on Apollo's Chariot several years ago? --McDoobAU93 16:54, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

SeaWorld San Diego

Why is there no topic of Incidents at SeaWorld San Diego under the incidents page? I know of at least two incidents that happened at this park concerning the killer whales, both were heavily covered in the news. One happened in the early 70s by the original Shamu herself. The second involves the incident with Ken Peters in 2006. The latter incident has resurfaced in the media due to the raw video of the attack being leaked on YouTube. I would edit the page myself however, I am new to being an account user and am not entirely clear on the rules of editing. I also work for SeaWorld Parks and Entertainment and I believe it would be inappropriate for me to edit any related articles concerning SeaWorld parks or animals. Anyone able to look into this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.44.112.29 (talk) 23:17, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

The incudents described here involve serious injury or death. I don't believe the Ken Peters incident in 2006 resulted in any serious injury, unless you mean a different one. An editor would have to research the one regarding Shamu. Do you have a year or date? BashBrannigan (talk) 02:00, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Adventure Island incident

There's been quite a bit of reverting regarding this incident. In my opinion, it belongs in the article because it involves the death of an employee while performing their job within the park. This incident can fall under Item #4 (Act of God), or, if additional information suggested by one of the warring editors can be sourced reliably, under Item #3 (negligence by park). The source describing the incident makes no statement about the park being found negligent, as suggested by one editor in their edit summary here. I would invite other editors to join in the discussion here instead of continually reverting each other. --McDoobAU93 05:32, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

The article should only include incidents directed related to park events, not lighting strikes, heart,attacks, etc. There must be a precedent in for everything in Wikipedia in external media and that's not the case here. Look at articles in reputable newspapers, magazine or books which discuss deaths at Seaworld parks and they exclusively deal with deaths of trainers. By including deaths by lightning and heart attacks the article is guilty of original research. Media discusses incidents of death or injury at various Seaworld parks, because they see a pattern of possible negligence relating to the animals. If their are articles saying Seaworld is guilty of negligence in other ways I haven't seen them. Wikipedia is not a newspaper and every death even if it was reported in the media isn't reason for inclusion. BashBrannigan (talk) 22:29, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Include mention of the accident in this article. Cla68 (talk) 22:33, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Tilikum/Brancheau photo

Editor Mariomassone (talk · contribs) added this photograph purportedly of Tilikum and trainer Dawn Brancheau taken in 1998. Brancheau, of course, was the trainer killed by Tilikum in 2010. I've removed the picture from this page (but not SeaWorld Orlando, where it was also added) for a number of reasons, listed below:

  1. We have no verification that the trainer in the image is indeed Brancheau.
  2. Even if we did, the image is from several years before the incident in which the two are connected, so I don't think this adds anything to this summary article.
  3. Lastly, I feel this might be an attempt to memorialize Brancheau.

The first and third reasons would also apply at the photo's use in SeaWorld Orlando, but again, I'm leaving that alone for now, pending this discussion.

--McDoobAU93 17:36, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

9 year old girl bitten

No mention of the 9 year old girl bitten on Feb 22, 2014?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2569898/SeaWorld-dolphin-bites-nine-year-old-girl-family-visit-Texas-park.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.202.79.241 (talk) 17:14, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Be bold and feel free to add it. Just be sure to keep it factual and neutral. --McDoobAU93 18:00, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Incidents at SeaWorld parks. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:25, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Incidents at SeaWorld parks. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:47, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

abuse of whales

You forgot to mention the incidents involving the whales and dolphins. Their illnesses ,mistreatment and untimely deaths. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.111.235 (talk) 18:40, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Sources, please? And be aware that Blackfish doesn't count. --McDoobAU93 19:18, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

ok so i just want to say












hi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.66.196.45 (talk) 21:10, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Incidents at SeaWorld parks. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:34, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

should we mention the various animals' suicide attempts

e.g. Szenja the polar bear, and several of the orcas, or is this article just about humans? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:7256:2500:551D:637F:8081:E59E (talk) 04:05, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Can you provide some proof of these incidents? Present them here and let the community review them. --McDoobAU93 12:21, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Incidents_at_SeaWorld_parks/Archive_2&oldid=1176054069"