Talk:Death of Garry Hoy

Unsourced quote

As soon as someone finds a citation for this Toronto Police report quote, it can be added back into the article, but for now, I'm storing it here.

"Toronto Police Service Detective Mike Stowell reported that:

"At this Friday night party, Mr. Hoy did it again and bounced off the glass the first time. However, he did it a second time and this time crashed right through the middle of the glass.[citation needed]"

Allanaaaaaaa (talk) 17:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

The quote was found in the July 12th 1993 Ottawa Citizen:

July 12, 1993 (page 2 of 42). (1993, Jul 12). The Ottawa Citizen (1986-) Retrieved from https://ezproxy.biblioottawalibrary.ca/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fnewspapers%2Fjuly-12-1993-page-2-42%2Fdocview%2F2339268800%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D46526

(not sure how to edit the page properly so I’ll leave it here for someone else) Phantom trash (talk) 21:29, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Untitled

I would so love to expand on this, but it's so hard to find information on him. --Sniper joe 23:41, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Toronto Star link in reference is a bad link — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.255.167.153 (talk) 20:11, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Birth and Age

I've noticed that while this article says Hoy was 39 years old at the time of the stunt, the snopes.com article linked to by this article says he was 38 years old. I did a google search and found that the web is very divided on this topic.

38

• Snopes.com
• dano.diaryland.com
• ABC News
• Toronto Star (Saturday, July 10, 1993, p. A4) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.28.255.222 (talk) 01:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

39

• Toronto Star (Monday, July 12, 1993, p. A6)
• Wikipedia
• Darwin Awards
• Answers.com
• Tens and tens of websites that copy-pasted from each other, since they all have the same wording.

Snopes.com is supposed to be credible, so they are pretty much all the weight on the "38" side of the argument. However, "39" looks like a better choice. Still, it would be good to know for sure.--Methegreat 00:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

-- I would say the Toronto Star article on Mon. July 12th would be the most accurate - because their information would have come from the official police report about the incident - correcting any mis-information or initial errors about the incident. Snopes would most likely relied on the Toronto Star Sat. copy, and not the Monday edition for their source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Themepark (talk • contribs) 02:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Gary or Garry ?

In the Myth Buster's episode they show the newspaper article and the name is spelled 'Gary', however this article is 'Garry'. Which is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.247.114.63 (talk) 04:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Sources style

Can anyone fix this? There aren't online archives for either of these papers, and since I live in Argentina, I can't go looking for the print versions and citing them approprietly per WP:Citing sources/example style#Newspaper/magazine articles (or online periodicals). --W2bh (talk) 15:50, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

== Break or pop out? ==

Did the glass break (as stated in the article) or did the pane pop loose? Just wondering Madmaxmarchhare (talk) 07:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

The Snopes article cited does not say anything about the glass not breaking and I could not find any more info on it. Factmike (talk) 20:26, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Window did not break?

One edit in January 2009 added the claim that the window "ironically" did not break upon hitting the ground, and another edit in January 2009 embellished this statement. These two edits were made anonymously and without citation. The existing references on the page make no mention of the glass surviving the impact, and this is a rather incredible claim. Until documentation is provided, I suggest that the article omit the claim. Sue D. Nymme (talk) 22:19, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I second this The Snopes article cited does not say anything about the glass not breaking and I could not find any more info on it. Factmike (talk) 20:29, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hudsucker Proxy

came out a year later. Has a similar scene. Wonder if it inspired it. 98.92.216.144 (talk) 03:31, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Personal history, character

The referenced article from The Globe and Mail refers to him as "popular" and says he was acting "playfully" at the time of his unfortunate accident, and also says the firm was "devastated" by his loss. That doesn't really support the notion that he was an intimidating jerk, and I also don't think it's really necessary for us to try to figure out whether they were only being charitable with that description. For purposes of this article, I don't think it is especially important to try to characterize his personality. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:32, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

The characterization of personality is a deliberate attempt to defame this person, in order to make the context of his Darwin Award more palatable. By depicting Garry Hoy as a malicious egotist, the reader is less likely to question the moral implications of a Wikipedia article lampooning his death & linking to a posthumous stupidity award. 77.102.62.3 (talk) 15:35, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 10 December 2015

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. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 00:35, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

---

Garry Hoy → Death of Garry Hoy – The manner in which this person died is the primary notable topic in this article, not the person himself. For further background on this question, please see the closing remarks and comments recorded in the just-closed discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garry Hoy. —BarrelProof (talk) 21:04, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

• Support For the reasons that I gave in the AfD. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 12:14, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Egsan Bacon (talk) 00:31, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

---

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.

"...died in an act of accidental defenestration"?

The lede paragraph of this article reads "Garry Hoy (January 1, 1955 – July 9, 1993) was a lawyer for the law firm of Holden Day Wilson in Toronto. He died in an act of accidental autodefenestration."

I knew what autodefenestration is without having to look it up. I doubt that very many readers of wikipedia do.

The Wikipedia Manual of Style has a few things to say about language like this:

• Under "Contested vocabulary" it says: "Avoid words and phrases that give the impression of straining for formality... "
• MOS:JARGON says: "Some topics are intrinsically technical, but editors should try to make them understandable to as many readers as possible. Minimize jargon, or at least explain it...."

In this case, Garry Hoy fell out of a window after thrusting himself at a large glass pane to impress new associates of his law firm. It's not a very technical concept at all. Calling this "autodefenestration" only gives the average reader something to look up - it's not encyclopedic.

I propose the second sentence in the lede be changed to something like:

"Hoy accidentally died after slamming his body at a large windowpane in a tall office building, falling through the window as the glass popped out of its frame."

This is wordier, but most English-speakers can understand it. Please don't be shy about suggesting a better way to say it. loupgarous (talk) 04:50, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

I agree, instead of using your proposed wording I just moved part of the "Death" section into the intro which I think flows nicely and makes the article shorter as well. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 15:51, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Apparent name change

   The wording "... (known in 1993 as the Toronto Dominion Bank Tower)." clarifies the relevance of the phrase, instead of leaving the reader to puzzle out a seeming non-sequiamur; in either case, citation is needed.< br>--Jerzy•t 07:13, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

With regard to the 'citation needed' claim that the TD Bank Tower is/was known as the 'Toronto Dominion Bank Tower' ...

1) The "TD" in TD Bank did and does stand for "Toronto Dominion", and has for decades. This is common knowledge for any citizen of Ontario. This was certainly true prior to 1993; (TD is one of our oldest banks!), and if you're too young to personally remember that fact, just ask your parents or grandparents. You can also check with the bank itself, or find one of the old bank buildings -- where the full name was literally carved in stone.

Story or Storey

The word keeps getting edited back and forth. Storey is the correct Canadian spelling, and the event took place in Canada, so there's argument for that. But if this translation is considered to be US English, then it should be Story. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.112.179.16 (talk) 18:13, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Since it's a Canadian topic, I suggest using Canadian spelling, but in the interest of WP:COMMONALITY, maybe it would be better to avoid the spelling question by using "floor". —BarrelProof (talk) 00:51, 19 September 2019 (UTC)