Talk:Australia Zoo

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Australia Zoo article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Australia: Queensland Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Australia Zoo is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Queensland (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Queensland.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Zoo

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Zoo, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to zoos, aquaria, and aviaries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ZooWikipedia:WikiProject ZooTemplate:WikiProject ZooZoo articles

About The Zoo

Would anyone object to the use of information provided from Australia Zoo's Media Section On The Website, i will add it and if you have a problem with it i will remove it, cheers CheetahKeeper 06:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Steve's death

Going along with the above comment, I don't think it's entirely relevent to mention his death just yet. Saying "Steve Irwin died" doesn't add anything to the information on the Zoo. What is important (for this article) is what Steve's death will mean for the zoo, and for that, we might have to wait to see what comments are made. Iorek85 05:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some anon editor has put it in. I say leave it in for now it will prevent others from adding it in again, likely at lower quality writing style, leading to long revert wars with unaware editors who don't read talk pages. Remove it once everything calms down.--Konstable 11:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed section on Steve Irwin's death as it had no content relating to the zoo. More detail on Steve Irwin in his own article. -- MightyWarrior 19:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Australia Zoo in Spanish

Please add [[es:Zoológico de Australia]] to this article.

improvements

I have taken the liberty to make what I believe a genuine effort to improve this article, unless you visit the zoo as much as I do, which is very very often. I highly suggest you do not undo these changes. In regards to this, I'm not saying this to sort of put you off, but as soon as I get any news and can confirm it, I always update. I'll try to get going again on the improvements section

Issues: How far ahead in the future is allowed for improvements? I've received news in regards to improvements, but most are seven years away, do you still want me to list them?

Yes i would recommend listing them but create a new section dubbed "future developments" CheetahKeeper 03:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Improvement' section can stay, but only if someone cite sources, such as the zoo's plan to expand itself to a staggering 500 acres, it might be true but still someone should cite the source, for example a news source, online article or the zoo's official website. StevenT1 21:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal Of "In Zoo's Own Words

If More Than 4 Wikipedians Object To "In The Zoo's Own Words" Then Wikiproject Zoo Will Remove It. Please Discuss and Just Not Remove. Cheers and Regards Wikiproject Zoo Manager CheetahKeeper 12:22, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that's not how things work. The material you added is not only copyright, but is inappropriate for an encyclopædia. Please review what Wikipedia is and is not. --cj | talk 12:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I object to the statement "You are not in a position to remove information." I am if it is unsourced and under copyright - no-one owns articles on Wikipedia. CloudNine 12:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Australiazoologos.jpg

Image:Australiazoologos.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 04:57, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Harriet' contradiction.

in the introduction it names harriet a 'generally aknowleged to be the worlds oldest chelonian' but underneath the picture of her it states that she is in fact the second oldest. which of these is accurate???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.88.74 (talk) 11:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am indeed puzzled also i believe she was the oldest in captivity, maybe not the worlds oldest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CheetahKeeper (talk • contribs) 12:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Animal List

I have created an Animal List, please feel free to add more animals to it as im not sure i have covered them all, it did take a great deal of time to include the ones i have. When i get the chance i will continue to improve until it is a decent article. Please feel free to lend a hand, would be interested if anyone has a map of the zoo or can provide more info of current plans. ZooPro (talk) 09:55, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sale of Australia Zoo

I have added details surround the sale of Australia Zoo to Animal Planet. These appear to be unfounded as I have discovered two sources where Terri denies this. Please feel free to remove the whole paragraph if deemed appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.218.151.246 (talk) 17:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine with me. Good Work ZooPro (talk) 10:44, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Closure of Austrailia Zoo

The article should note the rumours that the zoo is due to close due to a financial crisis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.247.204 (talk) 11:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No it should most definitely not include rumours, especially when they have been denied. If and when there are any facts related to a financial crisis or zoo closure then it should be mentioned. - Shiftchange (talk) 12:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The likely closure is more than rumour due to the high number of verifiable press reports. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.247.204 (talk) 12:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No matter what the press says, and how many times, until the zoo announces closure it's still a rumor. Donlammers (talk) 13:20, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The chances of Australia Zoo closing are 10 billion to 1. It is not going to happen, there are safe guards that prevent it from happening. All of these rumours are because of two former staff members wishing to grind an axe with management. ZooPro 12:37, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Australia Zoo is a private business. There cannot be any safeguards to prevent it closing. Private zoos are generally loss-making or very poor investments at best. There is a good chance it will close at some stage.Royalcourtier (talk) 07:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Size

How could a now 100 acre zoo have been doubled in size by the purchase of 4 acres?Royalcourtier (talk) 07:31, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]