Jump to content

Talk:Harambe

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Generic hipster (talk | contribs) at 23:28, 8 August 2016 (→‎Addition of the popular 'Dicks out for Harambe' phrase to this page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article should be deleted

Does this Gorilla seriously need it's own wikipedia page? It will be forgotten in a few weeks like that Cecil thing. Online global lynch mob does not equate to note worthiness130.195.253.76 (talk) 01:01, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Go back and read your own post. It states: "It will be forgotten in a few weeks like that Cecil thing." You just said that the "Cecil thing" was forgotten. Yet, you yourself just remembered the "Cecil thing". So, your premise -- by your own admission -- is invalid. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:11, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You can't "vote" here. If you want to vote, you have to go to this page: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harambe. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:56, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this will be forgotten, the Internet Is just over reacting again. Seriously, Gorillas are killed every day by illegal hunting, Yet we don't care out that, This is stupid and i don't care about it at all, You are all overreacting, Get it together — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C0:C700:A540:5921:8C58:17F9:4BCF (talk) 23:40, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 June 2016

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Death of Harambe. Most !voters here seem to agree on moving the article to something referencing the gorilla's death, and "Death of Harambe" was the idea with the most consensus behind it. (closed by a page mover) Omni Flames (talk) 00:43, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]



HarambeHarambe (gorilla) – location for disambiguation, name could also refer to Disney's Animal Kingdom#Africa or Harambee stuff or the 1988 song he was named after. Ranze (talk) 21:49, 3 June 2016 (UTC) --Relisted. Steel1943 (talk) 17:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

*Against. Moving a page during an AfD debate is confusing and provocative. Wait and see if the article survives. WWGB (talk) 01:43, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it doesn't then it would be mismanaged, consensus is clearly for keep and it is well sourced. We need the name to be a disambig eventually anyway and this discussion should not hamper that. Ranze (talk) 07:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
seems like excessive name bloat. Cincinatti will be mentioned in the article and enhance searches without having to be in the title. That would only be needed if there is some other notable gorilla named Harambe.
come to think of it, gorilla could also be unnecessarily long. Something like Harambe (ape) would be briefer and plenty since the are no other notable apes with the name, gorilla or otherwise. Ranze (talk) 04:20, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to "Death of Harambe" - The event itself is notable, though the gorilla is not. This is the comprehensive reason I was opposed to deleting this page. However, I don't endorse keeping the subject matter of this predominantly about the gorilla. DARTHBOTTO talkcont 08:46, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Child banged his head on concrete

Zoo director Thane Maynard stated, "The child was being dragged around ... His head was banging on concrete.

I did not notice this happening in the video clips shown on CTV News. Do any of our sources include a clip showing this happened so we can witness the speed of impact? Ranze (talk) 22:01, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth: It's my understanding that the child was with the gorilla for a full ten minutes or so. The TV news stations usually show only a 1-minute clip or so (from that ten minutes). Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:44, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
http://uproxx.com/news/video-child-falling-gorilla-cincinnati-zoo/ supposedly had a greater length of video than most but it seems to rely on linking to tweeted videos in three parts which were later taken down rather than hosting it independently. Ranze (talk) 07:03, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the drag footage and would not call it rough. Video is unusual for Wikipedia. There is the question of who holds the rights to it and whether it would be fair use. I would be more interested in seeing any headbashing since that is more potentially injurious. It takes minimal force to move someone across water. Ranze (talk) 04:18, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

POV Enclosure incident and death

  • Section needs to present material on danger to the child.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:25, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section needs to detail the events in the order in which they occurred. Presently the section ledes with the shooting of the gorilla. The order needs to be the order in which things happened: child falls in; gorilla takes possession of or acts protectively towards child; mother and bystanders phone 911 (unless phone call precedes gorilla's first approach to child); gorilla brutally drags child about; zookeepers arrive; gorilla is shot. Presenting events out of order is a kind of POV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:25, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section needs to devote space to both to primatologists and public figures who recognize the need to kill the gorilla to save the child. And to those who oppose the shooting and/or think that the gorilla was protecting the child.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:25, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding a picture

I just consolidated a new category commons:Category:Gorilla_gorilla_in_Cincinnati_Zoo and was wondering if anyone is familiar enough with Harambe to know if he is in any of these or not. I'm not good with faces. Ranze (talk) 06:21, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The incident or the gorilla?

I think the above renaming conversation is completely defunct, considering that it practically undermines the failed AfD that took place simultaneously. However, we should gather consensus for whether or not we want this article to be about the animal, or the incident that concerns the animal. I'd like to open that up for discussion now. DARTHBOTTO talkcont 01:50, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the consensus in the AfD was pretty clear about making it about the incident. I had a feeling it would go like this, though. Same old biography, same infobox, same categories, same structure, new hat. If the article's called Death of Harambe, it should be about Harambe's death, not Harambe. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:04, June 25, 2016 (UTC)
Actually if you read the text the article is almost entirely focused on his death and aftermath - lead section and 90% of the main text. And why wouldn't it, that's all the sources we have. Some low-WEIGHT biographical details sub-section and infobox about the animals is needed background context, other similar death incident articles have the same things. The picture shows the incident of his death. Categories, eh, whatever, it would be odd not to have the animal categorized. -- GreenC 03:59, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Right from the start, the gorilla's name is bold and followed by a birthdate. Deaths don't have birthdates. Or early lives. No breeds, no sexes, no weights. They certainly don't have deaths. If this was an article about an individual gorilla in the United States, yes, it would be weird to not categorize it like that. But no death in history has ever been an individual gorilla anywhere.
An event article should start "On May 28, 2016...". And use an "infobox event" instead of an "infobox animal". Things like that. Alternatively, give it an animal's title, like it had before we mostly agreed the animal wasn't notable. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:34, June 25, 2016 (UTC)
No problem but honestly those are superficial edits that could be fixed in 5 minutes. As I said though, information about the animal is needed context with appropriate WEIGHT. An event article will have information about the animal's background and history. -- GreenC 13:47, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, he should have a section. So should the kid, the shooter, the parents and the advocates. None of them should get personal infoboxes. If you can fix it in five minutes, probably best you do, because I'd take at least an hour. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:49, June 25, 2016 (UTC)
I got a start on it. Don't be shy in improving. The shooter seems to be hidden well. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:19, June 25, 2016 (UTC)

Name the child and parents?

The names are public knowledge in multiple reliable sources. Is there some reason we are not naming them? -- GreenC 14:53, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Probably because this is currently about Harambe. If it were about his death, they would certainly have pertinent roles. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:50, June 25, 2016 (UTC)
The article title was decided by consensus with an RM. There's no debate about that. It might have to do with privacy concerns of children in BLP1E's? The only rationale I can think of for removing the victim's name. -- GreenC 03:10, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's probably it. Some rabbits say nothing makes the Boogeyman hungrier than a child using their real name online. I haven't heard anything about someone else disclosing it, but maybe shouldn't chance it. Anyway, the victim's name was Harambe. "Johnny" was just an imaginary victim from an alternate dystopian future. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:56, June 26, 2016 (UTC)

There's also the veiled death threats against the mother: "Some animal lovers even suggested she should have been shot and killed instead of the gorilla Harambe." I don't think Wikipedia wants to be held liable. — Wyliepedia 02:22, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It would be the source we cite that would be liable, not us. Pretty sure Brock Turner is getting death threats, yet we don't hide his name. Ranze (talk) 08:27, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:BLPNAME, "Caution should be applied when identifying individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When deciding whether to include a name, its publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories. Consider whether the inclusion of names of living private individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value. The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons."--Carwil (talk) 11:39, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2016

I feel that there needs to be at least a little bit of information about the Death of Harambe as an internet meme. http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/harambe-the-gorilla-s-death

73.223.146.233 (talk) 19:45, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eh. Need reliable sourcing of course. Probably the most notable would be the Australian elections, where a campaign of voters added a third candidate to the ballot: the dead corpse of Harambe. -- GreenC 20:05, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. nyuszika7h (talk) 20:49, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There are plenty of reliable sources on this trend (example). A small note is entirely appropriate under the Reactions section. 109.79.100.198 (talk) 02:25, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The Sun is a reliable source? Really? WWGB (talk) 07:05, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 15 July 2016

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved as clear consensus has been established. (closed by non-admin page mover) Music1201 talk 16:06, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]



Death of HarambeKilling of Harambe – more of our sources refer to the gorilla's killing than his death. If he had died of natural causes then this incident would not be notable. The response here is to the gorilla's killing not his death so this would be more accurate. Ranze (talk) 08:24, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

I think that, given the significance of the meme and the relevance to the killing, 'Dicks out for Harambe' should be added to this page. It has a strong social media presence, and there are news articles from reputable websites documenting the movement.

I suggest the addition of the sentence: "The killing provoked discussion in internet communities, prompting the creation of a social movement 'Dicks out for Harambe' in memorial for the slain gorilla."

cited with this article: http://www.dailydot.com/unclick/dicks-out-for-harambe/

added after the sentence: "The incident was recorded... where the video went viral" in the 'Reactions' section. 72.208.63.239 (talk) 21:27, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Internet's general reaction to this seems notable to me, including #DicksOutForHarambe:
generic_hipster 23:28, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]