Talk:Colin McRae

[[{{{1}}} World Rally Championship|{{{1}}}]]

"Versions 04 and now 2005 have brought an extremely arcade rally driving experience to gamers."

Most "gamers" would agree the Colin McRae games are leening more on the simulation side than the arcade side...

-- Colin McRae is the second-most successful World Rally Championship driver of all time after Carlos Sainz

Colin's co-driver in early years

Can someone verify Colin co-driver from years 1993-1996? I know that Alison Hamilton was his co-driver in 1992, Grist since 1997, but I'm not sure about the gap... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Maggot666PL (talk • contribs).

McRae was co-driven by Derek Ringer from the 1987 RAC Rally to the 1996 Rallye Catalunya (see RallyBase profile for more information). Prolog 23:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting me quickly. Now it's complete. Maggot666PL 00:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

1999?

Someone is constantly changing the year Colin won the WRC title... Is it one person with dynamic IP? Maggot666PL 14:25, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Helicopter Crash

A German site is reporting that Colin was on board. Page edited to reflect this although death hasn't be edited until an English site confirms. VonBlade 20:09, 15 September 2007

Why does it say "was" before he has been confirmed as dead. Please lets keep Wikipedia factual. ResearchUK 20:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I did keep it factual. I updated the page as further, substantiated, confirmation came in. Plus, linguistically, was is the correct usage. Even if he wasn't, he wouldn't be at that current moment, therefore was (past-tense) is the correct word. I couldn't exactly put "is on board" could I. "Might have been onboard" is just obfuscation. VonBlade 21:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

RFPP time methinks. WATP ^(talk) • _(contribs) 20:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Already done. --Golbez 20:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Gotta say it doesn't look good.

But until it's confirmed...

Golbez, how am i causing a riot? purely airing my thoughts. better not air my thoughts about you... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geeness (talk • contribs) 21:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

The point was, vandalism happens, there's no point in making an emotional talk page post about it every time it happens. That will just raise tempers. --Golbez 21:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately this seems to be confirmed: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/more_sport/article2461339.ece

RIP.

It's not confirmed until the police say so; this won't happen until later in the day according to the BBC and AFP. —Neuropedia 05:03, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Changed from "was killed" to "is thought to have been killed" in Personal life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.140.181.139 (talk) 06:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Sources?

Strathclyde police have stated that there will be no identification until tomorrow morning, so any source cited is surely just speculative journalism? Readro 21:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I trust the London Times, so I think this is sufficient. --Golbez 21:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

But the Times are contradicting what the police have said. Readro 21:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

i was trying to say the same, but Golbez deleted my comment. bbc news 24 said the same thing, the victims won't be confirmed until tomorrow (sunday).Geeness 21:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Pay attention to the history, I didn't touch your comment. --Golbez 21:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

in the section above?? yeah, it was definitely you. why so high and mighty? i'm tending to believe the strathclyde police here, rather than london times, due to the fact the police are a bit closer to the accident than the paper. Geeness 21:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Er, sorry. I thought you meant the second comment you made; I thought it had been removed by someone else. I think the history is being wonky. I'm not trying to get away from my initial deletion, I admit at least to that one. =p --Golbez 21:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

thanks, lmao! Geeness 21:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

And the Strathclyde police haven't said a single thing contradicting the Times, so I dunno how you can believe one over the other. --Golbez 21:25, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

i was just saying i'm more inclined to believe the police, cos really, it WILL be them that confirms everything, at the end of the day (and i don't read the times! or any newspaper, for that matter).

The Times article quotes McRae's agent, who confirmed that he was the pilot. Police have said there were no survivors.Richard B 21:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Guys, are we sure he's dead? If we're not, then we should remove the "death status" from the page. --KaragouniS 21:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

He's been removed from the recent deaths page by an admin who has instructed people not to add him until verification takes place. He should not be listed dead until identification tomorrow. Readro 21:14, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Many sources are saying that he has died, but more are saying that it is unknown if he is dead or not. It's kind of hard to know which sources to trust at the moment. I'll admit it doesnt look good, but we dont actually know for sure if he is dead.

like i said, best to believe the Police! Geeness 21:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Afterall, Strathclyde police know more details about the crash than any news source. I think that the page should take all out references to his death, and shouldnt be updated until it is confirmed.

The page shouldn't be updated until he has been confirmed as dead.

The police and BBC are both saying that there won't be a formal ID until tomorrow. Colin McRae's page isn't saying anything. Perhaps the page should be changed to say something along the lines of "A helicopter came down close to his property, it is suspected Colin McRae may have been on-board" or something like that? When the identification is done then any information about his death can be added. Fact not supposition. --81.107.39.205 21:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Note that the Times article referred to now quotes McRae's agent, confirming that he was the pilot. The times article leads "THE former rally driving champion Colin McRae was killed...". That's a usually reliable source stating that he has been killed. Richard B 21:25, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

It's going to be a bit embarrassing for the Sunday Times tomorrow if it's wrong. I presume the story's gone to press as it has tomorrow's dateline. JRawle (Talk) 21:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Just because the Times says that he has died doesnt make it true. Nothing is confirmed, so we cant go ahead and say he has died. Once again I would like to ask if all references to his death are removed until it is officially confirmed. Everything being said so far is just speculation.

I could turn that around and say that just because the police say it, doesn't mean it's true. We have a highly reputable source saying something, and no remotely reputable source is challenging it. We also have the reputable source of McRae's own agent saying he was on the helicopter, which police confirm had no survivors. --Golbez 21:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Look, The Times is not right 100% of the time. Until the police actually release information I suggest that it be left as "suspected to be on board" "thought to be on board" as that is what the vast majority of sources are saying. Once the police release information I have no opposition to that being added. Personally I suspect it is him, but at the moment that's just supposition. (3rd attempt since I got edit conflicts the last 2 times I tried to add this >_< ) --Tethran 21:30, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

My comment was intended to be neutral. It's just that I hope the Times is embarassed. JRawle (Talk) 21:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Just because the police haven't released names doesn't mean they haven't told the Times. Sure, there won't be a formal identification until tomorrow, but they will have told the press, on a non-attributable basis, the details of who is dead Duke of Whitstable 21:34, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

THat may be, but as of yet it is still yet to be officially confirmed.

In addition it's is NOT the police who have told The Times. The Times quote "his agent" and there is always the possibility of a mistake. Granted, it seems likely that McRae was onboard, but until there's a statement from the police it should be left as "suspected" or similar. --Tethran 21:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it seems likely that this was Colin McRae, but searches reveal mixed results. The Times Online piece confirms two deaths, one of whom they claim is McRae, Channel 4 state it was just one death, and do not name names. It seems the Times may have created the article as a speculative piece so that they have something for the morning papers (note the date is quoted as the 16th, not the 15th, at the top of the page). Until it is confirmed by a second news outlet from a second source (not necessarily the police), I believe McRae is alive as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Seivad 22:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I think you are all giving the police some kind of special power that they just do not have, the police cannot decide if someone is dead or not! You are waiting for official confirmation from the police. What if someone blew their head off in front of you, would you think they are still alive until the police confirm they are dead? If the facts support it then you can call someone dead, there is no law about this, The facts are 100% clear as day in this case, his wife was driven home by police escort and all the neighbors were outside the house greiving as one report has put it.

Not saying we should wait for the police, but we need at least two reliable and non-conflicting sources I think. Seivad 22:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

And I've already posted about a half dozen sources which state "thought to be dead", "suspected", "agent says", etc. Since they don't conflict with each other go with those. This is not giving the police special powers to pronounce if someone is dead or not but whilst there is still uncertainty within the media the police are going to be the ones that provide certainty and reliable information. --Tethran 22:25, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Fucking OWNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.61.39 (talk) 00:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Freeze?

Is it possible to freeze the page from changes overnight? Police say they aren't going to confirm anything until tommorow, and people keep changing between dead and alive because of the timesonline article. Until police confirm he is dead, we should keep his status as alive, otherwise it's just speculation. CDowns 21:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

You want Requests for page protection. Sam Blacketer 21:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

It's only done a total switch back to 'alive' once; if it continues then that may be grounds for a full protect. I obviously won't be the one to do it, but nor will I fight over it. Also, only the police can speak facts? So if his wife said he was dead, that would be only speculation? What about his agent? Oh wait... he already did. --Golbez 21:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

<after edit conflict> Except that we have a usually reliable source claiming that he is indeed dead. Why should we pick, say, the BBC (who are not confirming anything) over the Sunday Times (who have spoken to his agent) for sources? Do we prevent sources from the Times in other wikipedia articles. No - that's just silly. Richard B 21:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Urgh. We also have a usually reliable source saying that it will not be confirmed until tomorrow. Wait until then. Until then the Times article is referenced and it says it is suspected he's dead or something similar to that. Until there is official verifiable, factual information it should stay as "suspected" with the link to the Times for people that want to make up their own minds. --Tethran 21:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I just find it surprising that no one else has reported his death. When it's concerning someone's death, I'd rather be on the cautious side. We're not going to get any brownie points for adding his death to the article immediately, so I'd much rather wait for a formal identification. Readro 21:47, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the article should be fully protected until the Police or his family announce officially his death. Until then, everything we add about his death will be just pure speculation. --KaragouniS 21:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thats what i've been trying to say, but thus far I have been ignored. I know it looks bad, but nothing is confirmed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.200.198.161 (talk) 21:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6996860.stm , http://edition.cnn.com/2007/SPORT/09/15/mcrae.crash/ , http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/15/ncopter115.xml , http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=482017&in_page_id=1770 , http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=482017&in_page_id=1770 , http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2170269,00.html

Notice how all of them say things like "feared dead" or "his agent has said..." or "suspected". That is how it needs to be until the police, coroner or similar officially releases information --Tethran 21:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

This news report confirms he is dead - but I would not add it yet, it seems strange only one is saying it. Also, I have heard on TV that the police are saying nobody survived, and Colin's agent confirmed he was on board. 2+2=5 for the time being. — jacĸrм ( talk | sign ) 21:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

No, the most reliable source you will find on this are jounalists who are franticly puting the story together and speaking to everyone they can to determine who was on the Helicopter. Of course 100% it is him, all the police are doing is following the rules that are in place for incidents such as this. Even if someone decpitated themselves in front of 300 witnesses the police still would not confirm the facts until the family has been informed.

If the times are saying McRae is dead then McRae is dead, RIP. The police are the least reliable source at the moment strange as that seems.

Sorry. But there's a difference between "reliability" and "speed". The police want to make sure that it is him, and whilst it seems very likely that this is the case the fact that they want to absolutely confirm it makes them the most reliable source. I strongly suspect the journalists are correct but I'm sure we can all wait until tommorrow before calling him dead officially. --Tethran 22:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. It does look bad, but we still dont know for sure.

ALso, i noticed that some segments of the article have been changes to a past-tense. Could someone fix this up until everything is confirmed?

Impreza Picture

"won in this Impreza" cant be right because a No. 1 Impreza must be from the 1996 season when he was reigning champion. I believe his 1995 title winning car was No. 4

A couple of other things the article might want to mention

Terrible news if true. A couple of possible omissions from the article which folks might want to look at:

• Colin Macrae R4 performance car. News sources are available on Google for this car designed by Macrae intended to be on sale next year.
• Calling time on his rallying career. [This article http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13260890,00.html] at Sky is dated today saying he has called it a day. I don't know if this is a horrible coincidence or if it's an old article that Sky have merely updated today.

--kingboyk 22:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Not suitable for flying?

Listening to the video it says "locals say it was not suitable for flying" or words to that effect. Until I hear something from an expert who can say that I think that the information being added about it is irrelevant and inflammatory as it suggests McRae was at fault when this may well not be the case. Seriously. I have no problem with that being added when a news source says "xxx an expert in the field says that conditions were not suited to this particular type of helicopter" but just locals saying that he shouldn't have been flying? --Tethran 22:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Unless locals are aviators then they can merely speculate. Readro 22:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Which is the point I'm trying to make so surely that quote should be removed from the page as it's out of context and speculation at this point. --Tethran 22:14, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Yup, absolutely. Readro 22:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Nsudac 22:22, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

"Death"

Alright, it seems some of us beleive he has died, and some of us beleive that although it is likely that he is died, it is yet to be confirmed.

At the risk of making fools of ourselves, we should leave the article as it is, not refering to the fact he is dead yet. Face it, if it turns out he is dead, then those of us who think he may not be will look stupid, and if he isnt dead, those of us who are saying he is dead will look just as stupid. Can we just stop the discussion and leave the article as it is, for the time being?

Also, R.I.P if all this is true.

Leave it with it saying he's "strongly suspected to be dead" or something like that. Then no-one ends up looking like fools because we're right either way. --Tethran 22:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, god forbid anyone looks stupid. That really is the big picture on this one.

I said that in response to what was already said. Going with the wikipedia guidelines I do believe it should be left until there is official confirmation. Elsewhere I've already said my personal feelings on what's happened. But Wikipedia is somewhere for neutrality not an outpouring of grief. --Tethran 22:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Sky News has just said 4 people have been confirmed dead but no confirmation of who is dead is expected to be announced this evening. — jacĸrм ( talk | sign ) 22:30, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

And it's bits and pieces like this that are why it's protected as it is... With information coming in we're now at 1, 2, 3 or 4 people. I've heard all of those from difference sources so they're all conflicting with each other... It should be cleared up tomorrow when the police report on it. --Tethran 22:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

If he wasn't dead we'd know by now, the police would have contacted him or he would have made it clear to the press he is alive. Use common sense people, he's dead. This is a sad day for motor racing.

--Robnubis 00:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Colin Steele McRae, MBE (5 August 1968–15 September 2007)

We don't know for sure he is dead yet. Referring to him as deceased is nothing short of sick and whover is responsible ought to be ashamed.

We've already established that, and the page has gone become fully locked.

I wouldn't call it 'sick'. And yes, he is dead. Rest in Peace Colin.Outsid3r 23:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Full protection

There has been too much reverting, some of it with the edit summaries IN FULL CAPS, on this page. Formal identification of the two people who died in the helicopter crash is not expected until the morning, and the fact that some news sources have 'jumped the gun' does not provide the reliability which Wikipedia expects. I have put the page under full protection. All editors are encouraged to discuss changes on the talk page. Unprotection can be requested at this page. Sam Blacketer 22:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for confirming what some people have been saying for a while about Wikipedia's standards for reliability with regards the information available on this. --Tethran 22:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, sometimes people tend to forget that this place is an encyclopedia, not a gossip site. Colin is one of my favorite rally idols and I really hope he's still alive.--KaragouniS 22:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} (rm tag - no longer necessary ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC))

I would request that consistency be exercised here. The article is protected on the basis that edits constituted speculation, yet the lead speculates that he was killed. I am happy for the article to remain as it is, but would it not be more appropriate to deal in fact; stating that a helicopter registered to McRae crashed, killing all on board, but that the victims have not been formally identified. Coupled with the sources, it would enable the reader to conclude from that what they wish. BeL1EveR 22:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Aye. I'd be happy for it to state the facts that have been officially released - about the helicopter being registered to him, all on it being dead and that the victims have not been identified yet. It agrees with, AFAIK, every news report so far. --Tethran 22:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Formal identification or not, we have one site quoting McRae's agent saying he is dead, and zero sites saying he is alive, with the rest being non-committal. I appreciate that the consensus of WPans and most news sources are that we don't know for sure, but 10 out of 10 cats^H^H^H^H^H sources that expressed a preference are saying he's dead. My "vote" would be to indicate this information in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guinness2702 (talk • contribs) 22:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

While I appreciate the agent story has some weight, if it were true that his agent said this, you would assume that would form the basis of a confirmation? In the sense that all media outlets would accept his agent's assertion that "he is dead" as confirmation, and report accordingly? BeL1EveR 23:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Here is the BBC article just FYI for when confirmation arrives. SGGH ^speak! 23:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

As of 7:35pm EST, CNN & TSN are reporting that he has been killed. It does appear that the status of his young son is unknown.

Yeah, but these are mere mortal news sources. Haven't you heard that only the police - certainly not the family members - can ever truly say if someone is dead? (yes i'm bitter) --Golbez 23:37, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Bottom line..I've been a rally fan for 15+ years and I'm sad and discouraged by this news -- but I agree until we know the absolute truth--we should just pray for him and his family and friends.--microbunny 23:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

No, it is not the job of the police to determine when someone is dead or not. You know someone is dead when, well, when they die!! The only person who can legally declare someone dead is the coronor. But, we are not looking for a legal confirmation of someones death here. We are only looking for some reliable confirmation that he is dead and to be quite frank we have got that in spades. It is pretty obvious to anyone with any size brain that Colin McRae was killed in the crash. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.213.128 (talk) 23:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Easy, easy....no need to go nuts —Preceding unsigned comment added by Microbunny (talk • contribs) 23:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

who's going nuts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.213.128 (talk) 23:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

FFS. People still seem to be missing the point even after it's been said by an admin/mod. "Formal identification of the two people who died in the helicopter crash is not expected until the morning, and the fact that some news sources have 'jumped the gun' does not provide the reliability which Wikipedia expects." End of. --Tethran 23:57, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Just cause a wiki mod says something--doesn't make it so!! The telegraph is reporting that both McRaes agent and brother have said he was piloting the helicopter.

Also--wikipedia has multiple errors and other inaccurate info in a wide variety of articles so please don't get all crazy and claim wikipedia 'expects reliability'...don't piss in my ear and tell me it's raining..

His brother has confirmed that it was indeed Colin in the crash, his brothers confirmation is at the root of the times story as this is the source of the agent. All i am saying is that here should not have to be official confirmation from the police if there is evidence from other sources. i.e. if a well known celeb was killed in front of 5000 witnesses would you still wait 2 days for a coronors report to suggest they were dead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.213.128 (talk) 00:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with above comment!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Microbunny (talk • contribs) 00:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

From the BBC: "Strathclyde Police said Colin McRae, a keen pilot, is thought to have been on board with three others." "......There are no survivors." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.213.128 (talk) 00:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Emphasis on "though to have been on board". Please wait until official confirmation, per WP:NOT#CBALL... i.e., no speculation. Also, please refrain from personal attacks and insults. Thanks, --Madchester 00:23, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me!!! What are you talking about personal attacks and insults ?

What is an official confirmation? His brother has said he was the pilot - is that not classed as official confirmation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.213.128 (talk) 00:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

personal attacks?? man there are too many sensitive people on here--stop crying and grow a spine!! oh wait...wiki-mods are always right!! And no, I'm not being a wise-ass I'm just sick of being told what I can/cant say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Microbunny (talk • contribs) 00:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Madchester - what are you talking about - how dare you send me a message RE: personal attacks?? Please explain where i have made a personal attack on anyone? I want an apology from you now please. If you want an personal attack however i am happy to oblige.... Take that stick out of your ass!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.213.128 (talk) 00:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

So this is the reply i got from Madchester: "Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you. --Madchester 00:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)"

So this place is utter joke - who do you think you are Madchester and can you please show me where i have made any personal attacks? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.213.128 (talk) 01:03, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

'Anyone that takes themselves too seriously doesn't understand how to include themselves in their own criticism. Then they end up becoming a parody of themselves.'--Microbunny 01:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

"It is pretty obvious to anyone with any size brain that Colin McRae was killed in the crash." Is not a personal attack - it was not directed at anyone in particular, it was not directed at anyone at all. It is a phrase, a common phrase at that. It simply means that it does not take a genius to work it out.

Telling you to get the stick out of your ass may actually be a personal attack, but to be honest after your stupid warning you deserved it. So an apology will be acceptable and i will then drop it.

I want an apology too. I also got a message..albeit worded politely..but I'm still annoyed with your assertion--Microbunny 01:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

First hit on a google search for Colin McRae - The Scotsman Newspaper "Rally ace Colin McRae dies in helicopter crash"

http://news.scotsman.com/entertainment.cfm?id=1483222007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.213.128 (talk) 00:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I want an apology too....I didnt swear, I didnt insult anyones race, creed, sex, religion..etc.. I dont believe anyone, including myself, did anything to warrant that comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Wikipedia is written by lots of different individuals. There's no mechanism for the site as a whole to come forward and say "I'm sorry". If you feel an apology is in order, then ask for one from the person you believe wronged you. But a general plea is too untargeted to have any effect. --Cyde Weys 01:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Cyde, In this case they are not General pleas, they are actually directed at user: Madchester who seems to have got his knickers in a twist about something and is publicly accusing people of being insulting when they are not.

Page unprotected

The page has been unprotected as an admin has decided enough sources are available for CM's death to be added to the article (see edit summary) Duke of Whitstable 01:21, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, but this still may be wrong. I hope he might still be alive. PayneXKiller 01:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

i hope Elvis is still alive dude but i am pretty much resigned to that fact he is not. I think the same can be said of Mr McRae, RIP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.213.128 (talk) 01:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Colin McRae is deader than Steve Fossett. They actually have the body on hand. --Cyde Weys 03:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Speculation on death

his ID has not been confirmed so you can't say he is dead - anyway this is a breaking new story shouldn't wikinews be covering this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.220.138 (talk) 04:25, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

He flew helicopters. He owned the helicopter. His agent says he was flying the helicopter. And most important for a celebrity, he hasn't turned up anywhere saying "I'm not dead, really." At this point, the only way he's alive is if his death was intentionally faked. -- Cyrius|✎ 05:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Police have confirmed he owned the helicopter, but believe he was on board. Until it's verified that he actually was on board, it's unfair to all to simply assume he's dead, and present that as canonical fact. — Neuropedia 05:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

We work by sources. If several reliable sources say that he is dead based on the information they have, the confirmations from his brother and his agent etc, then we can consider him dead too, as long as we don't give the reader the false idea that the police has too confirmed his death. I don't really care either way. We should concentrate on improving the article rather than arguing about something that won't make much difference soon. Prolog 05:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

One reliable source, from what I've seen (The Times' website) has said he's dead; all others say "maybe", "thought to be", "believed", etc. What's the harm in protecting and waiting until the facts are in? — Neuropedia 05:42, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

What's the harm in continuing to work on the article while more facts are coming in? Why do you want to close it down to editing? --Cyde Weys 05:51, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I doubt there are many more facts to come in beyond the undoubtedly inevitable confirmation that McRae and his son were actually on board, but until then, I was simply looking to have the previous protection re-instated to stop edits going overboard. Wikipedia still deals in fact, yes? —Neuropedia 05:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

In fact, look at the edits in the last 30 minutes: conflicting information, a "recent death" header with the 'death' date rescinded from the first paragraph; a reversion to a posture of the current situation rather than extrapolation, and then protection until later - say, this afternoon? - would halt this back-and-forth editing. —Neuropedia 06:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

You're describing the same editing pattern that happens with all of our current events articles. What's the big deal? --Cyde Weys 06:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Meanwhile, the quality of the article goes down as people edit the article in an irresponsible manner. If policing such changes irks administrators, I don't see the point in continuing. Ho hum. If that's the status quo, I really don't have the energy to rock the boat. —Neuropedia 06:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)