Talk:Shark!
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Fair use rationale for Image:SharkFuller.jpg
[edit]
Image:SharkFuller.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 17:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
One shark or two?
[edit]In this issue from LIFE magazine the attack is blamed on a second shark which broke through a protective net, not the sedated bull shark:
Stefanmuc (talk) 19:09, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
I've seen some debate as to whether the event happened at all. A user on the old IMDb message boards wrote in 2009 "it was revealed in Skin Diver magazine, that the footage scene [sic] in the movie is NOT a real shark attack, that it was faked, and the publicity surrounding the movie (at least in regards to the film featuring an actual shark attack "caught on film") was bogus." [1] No exact sources provided, but something to keep in mind. Also of note, José Marco's name doesn't appear in the publicly available Global Shark Attack File, [2] although I don't have access to the more detailed International Shark Attack File, which is "accessible only to scientists whose access is permitted only by a review board."
As far as I can tell, both the evidence for and against the incident seems to be entirely hearsay, the only difference being that the story of a shark attack caught on film is more fantastical, which makes it more likely to be printed and reprinted, which eventually leads to the story becoming accepted as fact.
[1] https://www.filmboards.com/board/p/1790578/
[2] http://www.sharkattackfile.net/incidentlog.htm
--Double - U (talk) 17:43, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Title
[edit]Where is the support for calling this article Shark!? The film itself and every contemporary poster I have seen is simply Shark. 2002:620D:3AF:0:40FF:5CA:EFC:B980 (talk) 23:25, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
two sources in the article: