| Revision as of 16:40, 11 September 2006 edit159.189.72.54 (talk) All the idolatory tributes and commentary about Steve Irwin fail to recognize the basic tragedies in his approach. First, to build his image, he had to create an image of animals being inherently dan← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:43, 11 September 2006 edit undoSirengarg (talk | contribs)22 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| * Add a section that discusses the dark side of Steve Irwin, such as: | * Add a section that discusses the dark side of Steve Irwin, such as: | ||
| "All the idolatory tributes and commentary about Steve Irwin fail to recognize the basic tragedies in his approach. First, to build his image, he had to create an image of animals being inherently dangerous. Then he needed to harass and provoke them to show their ferocity and make his point. His success was in motivating behaviors in animals that would normally rather run away than attack, but that would not serve his purpose. Second, he routinely broke all the rules of good animal handling technique that most professionals recognize are the safest procedures for both the animal and the handler. How many uninformed individuals (and animals) have been injured imitating his reckless ways, thinking that if Steve Irwin does it this way, it must be right?" | "All the idolatory tributes and commentary about Steve Irwin fail to recognize the basic tragedies in his approach. First, to build his image, he had to create an image of animals being inherently dangerous. Then he needed to harass and provoke them to show their ferocity and make his point. His success was in motivating behaviors in animals that would normally rather run away than attack, but that would not serve his purpose. Second, he routinely broke all the rules of good animal handling technique that most professionals recognize are the safest procedures for both the animal and the handler. How many uninformed individuals (and animals) have been injured imitating his reckless ways, thinking that if Steve Irwin does it this way, it must be right?" | ||
| * The above is an opinion, not a fact. It doesn't belong in his article at all. There is no evidence people were harmed by wild animals, because they were influenced by Steve Irwin. Besides was DC Comics and Walt Disney Pictures sued when children imitated Superman and Peter Pan and were injured and killed? You can't blame a professional because your children or yourself copied their actions when both he and common sense dictate "Don't do that, its dangerous". Parents are respondsible for their children's actions, not a man on the other side of the world. How about we post articles of the people who's lives were saved because they remembered what the Croc Hunter said when a gator or croc attacked them? Such as the case of a child in Florida this year who's quick thinking and memory of the show saved his life. Truthfully, neither of these types of articles belong in the Misplaced Pages article. Let's stick to facts, not opinions. | |||
Revision as of 17:43, 11 September 2006
- expand on his environmentalism
- some mention of his BBQ with Howard & Bush? (without giving it undue weight)
- role in Australian culture, Croc Dundee lineage, "larrikin" values, romanticised adventure & outback spirit?
- The Ghan?
- Australian reaction? eg backlash?, cultural cringe?, ocker?, tall poppy syndrome?
- Expand television information
- Write further about the development of Australia Zoo, development of conservation activities etc
- Add link to Flickr Group http://www.flickr.com/groups/steve_irwin_tribute/ where nature photographers pay tribute to Steve and group Nature shots relating to Steve's Work.
- Is this a good idea? External links are evil, and flickr is generally an indiscriminate collection of information.
- Expand on top half of career section, for example: his early work, meeting John Stainton, as well as the numerous docos that are not written about yet.
- Rumor that previous injury from a crocodile seperated his ribs slightly, making it more likely for the stingray to hit his heart.
- Remove from other languages that he was a Liberal Party supporter.
- Add a section that discusses the dark side of Steve Irwin, such as:
"All the idolatory tributes and commentary about Steve Irwin fail to recognize the basic tragedies in his approach. First, to build his image, he had to create an image of animals being inherently dangerous. Then he needed to harass and provoke them to show their ferocity and make his point. His success was in motivating behaviors in animals that would normally rather run away than attack, but that would not serve his purpose. Second, he routinely broke all the rules of good animal handling technique that most professionals recognize are the safest procedures for both the animal and the handler. How many uninformed individuals (and animals) have been injured imitating his reckless ways, thinking that if Steve Irwin does it this way, it must be right?"
- The above is an opinion, not a fact. It doesn't belong in his article at all. There is no evidence people were harmed by wild animals, because they were influenced by Steve Irwin. Besides was DC Comics and Walt Disney Pictures sued when children imitated Superman and Peter Pan and were injured and killed? You can't blame a professional because your children or yourself copied their actions when both he and common sense dictate "Don't do that, its dangerous". Parents are respondsible for their children's actions, not a man on the other side of the world. How about we post articles of the people who's lives were saved because they remembered what the Croc Hunter said when a gator or croc attacked them? Such as the case of a child in Florida this year who's quick thinking and memory of the show saved his life. Truthfully, neither of these types of articles belong in the Misplaced Pages article. Let's stick to facts, not opinions.