User talk:Dutzi

This user may have left Wikipedia. Dutzi has not edited Wikipedia since April 2011. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome!

Hello, Dutzi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! -Razorflame (talk) 16:37, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Names" of dinosaurs[edit]

By "names" of the dinosaurs, I meant in the same sense that "dog," "cat," "horse," and so on are "names" of those animals, and in The Son of Kong article, that is the way the terms are being used, and accordingly should not be capitalized. Ted Watson (talk) 19:22, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Could you please post your answers directly after my comments, so that other users are able to follow the discussion if needed." Uh...if you mean on my talk page, how would you know? If not, where? This is where the "Talk" link in your signature takes me and it is so labelled, although I must concede it doesn't look like any other Talk page I've dealt with. That--which is not my fault--aside, in a fair amount of Wiki-user talk page discussions that I've been in, nobody else has complained to me about doing it this way, and I have seen many other examples of having to bounce back and forth between two users' respective talk pages to "follow the discussion," so if all those other examples of capping dinosaur names proves me in the wrong there, you are in the wrong here. However, to that I maintain my position that the words are used in The Son of Kong in a non-scientific manner, that they are in that context not proper nouns any more than referring to the "monkeys" in the earlier scenes of that film would be, and that the fact that they are ALSO the genuses (or geni or whatever the plural of genus is) of the creatures is therefore irrelevant here. Ted Watson (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Fragmented discussion": Now that I think of it, somebody did once reply to a post from me on his discussion page by posting on mine a simple note that he had replied on his. However, as long the Wiki rule is disregarded so widely and admin makes no effort to enforce it....

"Dinosaur names": You wrote--"If you say that it is 'irrelevant,' why not use the common 'scieintific' diction?" Because that is what I said was irrelevant! In context, what you wrote doesn't make any sense. "I'm tired" of dealing with such irrational "defenses" from you. That may not be very "civil," but if the Wiki talk page rules don't say something about participants being fair and reasonable, they bloody well should be amended to do so. Ted Watson (talk) 19:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reservoir Dogs[edit]

Do you have a source? Besides it's trivia that we've been trying to reduce.--The Dominator (talk) 22:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Those aren't reliable sources, it's trivial OR, I have cut down from around forty cultural references to around ten, there was a pointless "Connection to other Tarantino films" section that I eliminated, it doesn't matter how you phrase it, it's still an accusation of plagiarism. Trivia is strongly discouraged and if the article has any chance of passing a GA review then most of it has to be eliminated. I agree that it is notable how Tarantino was accused of plagiarism, but mentioning specific movies is trouble.--The Dominator (talk) 14:36, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and about the article mentioning other films: that will undoubtedly be deleted within the next couple of days, that's what I meant with reducing trivia.--The Dominator (talk) 14:37, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: First sentence in Reese Witherspoon article[edit]

Hi Dutzi, I've replied at Talk:Reese Witherspoon#First sentence, regards. Spellcast (talk) 05:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: italics[edit]

Hey, how are you, well, I trust. Did you know that foreign words are supposed to be in italics in the English language? Noir is not exactly an English word. Yet, It seems the convention is that film noir is not often found in italics (although it can be and it would not be wrong, common usage and all of that). Yet, noir by itself should be. See the talk page in the Film noir article for more. Luigibob (talk) 23:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey back! No, no, need to revert. The convention is (as mentioned in the discussion) that "film noir" is commonly used in the English language, and as such, it does not be in italics (not my view). However, noir (when used alone) and femme falale and other foreign words should be in italics. My best to you -- ♦ Luigibob ♦ ^{"Talk to Luigi!"} 21:45, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re the Getaway[edit]

I agree with you that the film has always been included in the canon as a neo noir. If you ever need my help on anything, give me a shout out. Be well. -- Luigibob (talk) 01:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re Gaslight[edit]

I do agree with you that Gaslight should not be considered a noir...but there is a source...according to Spencer Selby...it's # 147 on his list....he calls it "an athmospherice remake of an excellent 1940 British picture." Also, although not included in Alain Silver's book, an editor calls the film "noir related." (Page 135). It's up to you if you want to add it back in. My best -- Luigibob (talk) 16:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey...Good analysis... My best Luigibob (talk) 14:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re Wikilinks[edit]

Sorry to get back to you so late...I'm not editing much w/ Wiki these days, some of the folk editing got me down, I do not need the head=aches. Re your question...I suggest you talk to User talk:Skier Dude, an admin and a real nice person. Take care.... Luigibob (talk) 15:08, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Romania[edit]

Hi! From your edits, it looks like you might be interested in contributing to WikiProject Romania. It is a project aimed at organizing and improving the quality and accuracy of articles related to Romania. Thanks and best regards!

--Codrin.B (talk) 04:07, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]