# Talk:Keyser Söze

I am not certain this character qualifies as a serial killer. Brutal? Homicidal? Certainly, but those characteristics do not make him a serial killer. There's nothing to suggest that anyone he's killed were due to some psychological compulsion of his. Does anyone oppose removing him from this list?

In the article it mentions only two usages of the phrase, one being satanic the other being a fabrication of another villain, but I have quite frequently seen it used in another sense: To coalesce a story using background objects.
An example of this is in American Dad, where Roger at one point says he "Keyser Soze'd [a] name using [Stan's] coffee cup". Tetris11 (talk) 11:54, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
It is also referenced in the pilot episode of "Go On" starring Matthew Perry (airdate: 08 Aug 2012 on NBC). When confronted by the group leader about his loss Perry's character, sports radio talk show host Ryan King, spins a tale about his wife dying from a rare blood disease. She embraces him and acknowledges how brave it was for him to open up and share his feelings with her. He responds by saying, "It wasn't brave." She: "It was." He: "It wasn't... true." She: "Which part?" He: "The whole thing. I made it up. Salamone isn't a disease. It's a restaurant right over there. I Keyser Söze'd you."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.230.130.228 (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 

Its not confirmed that Spacey was indeed Soze and there is even some dispute by the actors in the film as to who he is.  The director I believe also mentioned that he wasn't neccessarily Soze.
There is one thing the movie is clear about - the entire story is a LIE. Any attempt to try to pull any facts out of it is silly because we know that EVERYTHING we know is Verbal's version of events, and since we pretty sure VERBAL does not exist... it would make sense that neither do ANY facts. 
The devil's biggest trick is to make the world think he doesn't exist. This story's biggest trick is to make you think ANY of it actually took place.

No. The whole film was the devils trick. The 'devil' sat right there infront of the police and just let him walk away, with immunity. 100% Soze. We know that there might be a Soze because of the one surviving criminal who sketched the appearance of Soze.
-G  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.230.81.124 (talk) 00:59, 11 September 2008 (UTC) 

That's not true.  The surviving criminal describes the man he saw on the boat, but that is not necessarily Keyser Soze.  There is no evidence that Verbal is Soze.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.33.176.3 (talk) 20:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Soze is either i) Kint (Spacey) ii) Kobayashi (Postlethwaite) or iii) a figment of Kint's imagination.
The whole point of the ending is that it's ambiguous.  i) is possible (cigarette lighter; fax digifit of Soze according to the Hungarian - but how did he "know" that that person was Soze??) ii) is also possible (Kobayashi being a name on a coffee cup - and so perhaps not the real name of Postlethwaite's character) or iii) much of what Kint said during his interrogation bears similarities to names written on the wallboard facing him.  He may have told people (e.g. the Hungarian) that he was Soze, but was this true?  86.212.31.153 (talk) 21:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Look... There is no PROOF in the film that Kint is Soze. He MIGHT WELL be. But if we go only on the evidence WITHIN the film (as we should) - then concluding outright that Kint to Soze is similar to confusing the notions of "author" and "narrator". BigSteve (talk) 23:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
To all these people who claim there's no PROOF Kint is Soze: there's a single scene in the move which lasts about 0.3 seconds showing Kint killing Dean Keaton. So Keyser Soze is 100% Verbal Kint, there's not even an iota of doubt about it. Regarding the actors who claim they're are not sure if Soze was Kint, they're are just doing so to sauce-up the plot even further. Thanks!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.41.210.147 (talk) 23:20, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Interesting, I'm going to upload that scene.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darwish7 (talk • contribs) 17:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
How do we know the man on the boat was Söze? It's pretty hard to deny that Kint was the man on the boat, but the former affirmation seems tenuous. Both characters who claim that the man on the boat was Söze (Keaton just before being killed, and the wounded Hungarian) don't seem to have any concrete evidence; they just "deduced" that it was him. However, the movie itself points out that Keyser Söze often uses pawns, and brings up the possibility that he might not exist at all. So, the man on the boat could just be another pawn, or the whole plot about killing Marquez might've been a fabrication by Verbal. PebsBeans (talk) 03:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Just a thought - this article states Soze's attorney was called Kobayashi but the revelatory sequence at the end makes it clear that "Kobayashi" was just a name that Kint read on the bottom of Agent Kujan's coffee cup so do we really know what the Pete Postlethwaite character was actually called? Richard Barlow 15:45, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

I guess not --Darwish7 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 17:10, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I gave Keyser's identity its own warning label after the traditional spoiler tag.  While Soze's history is a spoiler in and of itself, his true identity is the main plot twist of the story. King Zeal 22:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't see a spoiler tag or warning of any kind.  Not that I haven't seen the movie, but there may still be people who haven't seen it and want to, yet stumble across this page.  I'm unfamiliar with how to add a spoiler warning - but somebody should probably do it. Beeeej 20:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Might also be a good idea to change the sketch picture under plot revelations since it may be easy to recognize which character in the movie is Keyser Söze. It is under the "revelations" title, but it is however easy to notice without "intention". I don't know how to do this, so if someone would feel inclined to do so, please do Andregulbrandsen 00:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Could've been a little quicker, I wanted to see that movie you asshats.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.200.43.230 (talk) 23:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC) 

The reason there is no official spoiler tag in wikipedia is because you read wikipedia at the risk of being spoiled. Why you would read an encyclopedia article about a character before seeing the movie is beyond me. As such I have removed the improvised spoiler tag. Aml830 (talk) 11:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
The reason I was reading the Keyser Soze wikipedia article after pausing the movie halfway through is because the name sounded familiar to me and I wanted to know why.  Then I see portrayed by:  Kevin Spacey right at the top of the fucking page.  Thanks for spoiling it you [removed personal insults]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.41.139.57 (talk • contribs) 22:33, 19 January 2013‎
There is no need for foul language like that; if you took the time to pause the film half way through and look up a character that the entire film is centered around, you clearly weren't that interested in the film. So I don't see your complaint? --Jasca Ducato (talk) 09:25, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Note that Wikipedia's spoiler policy has changed since the start of this discussion in 2007, and the current version is at WP:SPOILER: "Spoilers are no different from any other content and should not be deleted solely because they are spoilers." --McGeddon (talk) 11:23, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

(Not arguing or advocating spoiler policy) I look up movies regularly on wikipedia (not comprehensively) and this is the first time I've seen the main spoiler in the lede. (just checked The Sixth Sense as an additional data point, and nope, doesn't get spoiled till you read the plot section) 2603:8001:9500:9E98:0:0:0:9A7 (talk) 16:58, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

I think the line In the final scenes of the movie, it is revealed that Verbal himself is Keyser Soze
needs to be changed since it's POV. There is a strong implication in the film that this is the case, but
it's not certain and is open to other interpretations. One of which is that Keyser Soze doesn't actually
exist at all - since practically all scenes in the film are Verbal's narration, there's no proof that any
of them actually took place. — SteveRwanda 12:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from but the argument of whether any of the film happened due to Kint's fabrication is just too much of a nuisance. The line needs to be drawn. Satchfan 07:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
That's nonsense. The story's biggest strength is it's ability to make you refuse to believe it's a lie simply because it's such a good story. This is where the movie really becomes greater than traditional narrative. Like 'American Beauty', it makes you willfully ignore the facts of the narrative because you have affection for the story.thumpinc May 2006 (UTC)

Hi all -- I'm flagging this article for failing to follow Wikipedia's policies on verifiability and original research. In short, the culture impact, meaning of name, trivia, and media sections all need to be cited to reliable independent sources. --Tcatts 20:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Your opinion has been noted and rejected. This article details a fictional character, the only source of information available being a copyrighted motion picture script. The claims cannot be verified.

Contrary to the view stated here, there are real "facts" that can be obtained from the movie.  For example the opening and closing scenes.  The assasination, the interrogation and others.  From scrict analysis of this, it is entirely possible to theorise that kobayashi was in fact the master mind and verbal was sent to do his work.  In fact there are quotes that allude to this in the movie.  Something like, "You think you can catch Keyser Soze? You think a guy like that comes this close to getting fingered and sticks his head out? If he comes up for anything, it will be to get rid of me.", "He (Keaton) wasn't behind anything. It was the lawyer.", "We were there to buy a man, you simple boy. A witness. I don't know his name. A witness who knew the Devil.", " Keyser Soze - or whatever you want to call him - knows where I am right now.  He's got the front burner under' your ass to let me go so he can scoop me up ten minutes later.", "This guy (Verbal) is protected - From up on high by the prince of fucking darkness." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.151.14.101 (talk • contribs)  11:45, 15 April 2007.

Citing quotes from the film is just Original Research. You need to find reliable sources for other people presenting this idea if you want to include it in wikipedia. Wibbble 12:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I've given this article an adequate lead that actually discusses all of the major points of the article as per Wikipedia:Lead section. The remainder of the article is going to need major cleanup, however - the article is currently clearly structured to withhold the fact that Verbal is Soze until as far into the article. as possible. This is not good encyclopedia writing. Phil Sandifer 13:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if this would be worth mentioning in the "cultural impact" section, but in response to debates surrounding supposed "spoilers" regarding the seventh and final Harry Potter book (just hours to go, nooch), some folks on various forums have started to use the satirical phrase "Snape is Keyser Söze" (example).  Even if it isn't worth mentioning in the article, I thought some of the people who follow this talk page might get a kick out if it. - Ugliness Man 08:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I believe the IPA pronunciation is wrong. Not only is "ö" pronounced with a /ø/ sound rather than /o/ in both Turkish and Hungarian, you can actually hear Hungarian characters in the film pronouncing "Söze" with an /ø/ sound. American English doesn't define the pronunciation of non-English names. JIP | Talk 17:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
So whatever is heard in the movie should be included here as alternates, just as encyclopedias and dictionaries offer.  And there should not be any citations needed because it is a reference to a fictional character that appears in a singular movie.71.116.73.187 (talk) 23:51, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The latest change to this article states that Verbal Kint made Keyser Söze up. I don't think this is true. There is at least one source who has heard of Keyser Söze from someone other than Verbal Kint, and that's the police officer who faxes the picture to Kujan. I still believe in the most common interpretation, that Verbal Kint is Keyser Söze. JIP | Talk 19:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I've self-reverted here because Arcayne believes that my citation of Le Joueur Généreux constitutes original research [1].  I think it's fine as it is, but I'd like further input so I've called an RFC. --Tony Sidaway 10:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

"It's a devil of a job being Satan. No one knows just how much devilry is required" (The Telegraph): "Unfortunately, Satan isn't displaced so easily. He may, indeed, be thoroughly enjoying his temporary lack of profile, for as the Kevin Spacey character says in The Usual Suspects (albeit without acknowledgements to Baudelaire): 'The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled is convincing the world he didn't exist.'"[2]
Will this do? It establishes that someone else has made the connection between Baudelaire and The Usual Suspects. --Krieghabicht (talk) 12:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, there are dozens of references to the Baudelaire quote in discussions of The Usual Suspects.  However the actual quote itself is what makes it clear that the screenwriter is using a Baudelaire quote. --Tony Sidaway 12:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
If you source it to the DVD commentary as well, then that makes it even clearer – the filmmakers admitted it. --Krieghabicht (talk) 12:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. That's enough for me.  I've restored the Baudelaire and added the citation above with a quote from the reviewer. --Tony Sidaway 12:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Its enough for me, too. I wasn't opposed to the usage of the connection, I just wanted it cited within the scope of someone speaking about the film. That has been accomplished. Yay! - Arcayne (cast a spell) 17:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Where was 'Kobayashi' from?  The only known source in the film which indicates this is 'Redfoot' who calls him a limey, which means that he is British. But depite Postlewaithe being a Brit, his accent in the film is certainly not. His name suggest he is Japanese and his accent has an Eastern tinge to it - a mix of Oriental and Indian. In the article, someone has stated his nationality as Pakistani - someone is surely having a laugh. There's no proof whatsoever to suggest he is Pakistani. 80.195.166.92 (talk) 16:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Whilst his accent is odd, I came to the conclusion it was a Northern Irish accent that had been moderated by plenty of time spent in mainland UK. Which would still make him a limey. 21:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)~  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.136.185 (talk)  
I believe Kobayashi's accent is actually South African.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.44.197.132 (talk) 09:09, 9 March 2010 (UTC) 

In the introduction, it's stated that

Söze is an underworld kingpin [...]

I'm not a native speaker, so I searched around a bit, and found everything - but no useful explanation of that word. In most dictionaries, it seems to be just a technical term for some mechanical things. The only helpful definition of the word was in Wiktionary - which is linked heavily indirect: Mark the word "kingpin", search with google, go to Wikipedia, click through on "there is an article on Wiktionary" - this link can break at any node. My suggestion: Explain the word, use another word or link the word (to wiktionary, because Wikipedia won't really help you on this one). Regards,  -- 80.136.76.11 (talk) 06:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
The word Kingpin originally means "a pivot pin that provides a steering joint in a motor vehicle" but is used as "the most important person in an organization" mainly when talking about gangsters. e.g Söze is an underworld kingpin  basically means he was the boss or "most important person" in an organisation. Usually the name is used when talking about someone with a drugs empire, like KeyserSöze for example. I hope this helped.

There is that old farytale called "The emperor's new pants". As far as I can remember from my childhood, It's about two merry conmen, who trick an emperor into beliving they can taylor clothes, wich only the smart people can see. They take the emperors money, and present him with non-existent clothery. The emperor -embarrased that he can't see the clothes- poses as if he'd see them, and goes out in public naked, where his folk begins to laugh that the "Emnperor has no pants on"
Now, in German "The pants of the Emperor" translate to "Der Kaisers Hose", wich is pronounced almost exactly as "Keyser Söze". 
Think of it: 
- Invisibility as by Verbal
- Conmen involved
- The conned protagonist doesn't see the plot untill the catharsis.
What's your opinion? Can the name be a pun on this story?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.99.84.91 (talk) 15:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC) 

"Hose" is pronounced with an /o/ sound, while "Söze" is pronounced with an /ø/ sound. I am sure native English speakers will be unaware of, and most likely unconcerned with, this, but it is an important matter to speakers of any other language. JIP | Talk 20:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Actually, in one of the featurettes on the DVD, they explain how they came up with the name.  It was originally named after one of their friends who worked at a law firm ("Keyser Sunim", or something like that) but he was worried it might hurt his practice, being named as a criminal who murdered his family.  So they found a Turkish Dictionary, and chose Söze, which in Turkish means "Talks to much."  Since Keyser (Kaiser) means "King" in German (well, "Emperor", but in the featurette they said King), the name was literally (in German/Turkish) "King Talks Too Much", which fit Verbal's character. VegJed (talk) 03:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
According to VegJed, Söze means "talks too much" in Turkish...Roger Kints nickname is Verbal because people say he "talks too much." I think this should be evidence that RogerKint was KeyserSöze and not Kobayashi, or anyone else. Also at the very end Kint uses that Golden lighter that Keyser uses at the start. 

     AND if you listen closely, at the start when Keyser is talking to Keaton,
his voice sounds like Kints (Spacey's). 

Just thought I'd say that. :)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jinxparkour (talk • contribs) 18:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC) 
Just thought I'd mention that "Der Kaisers Hose" is grammatically incorrect for a German genetive. It would be "Die Hose des Kaisers", which kind of gets rid of that pun.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.28.185 (talk) 13:32, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 

However, Des Kaisers Hose works (it's archaic, but so is the story, which is actually named Des Kaisers neue Kleider). Still don't think it's a reference though, as the DVD commentary shows.87.78.3.205 (talk) 17:43, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The swedish movie Small Sussie (Smala Sussie) has a reference to Keyzer Söze. The police man explains that he has gotten a lot of information about criminals, and therefore asks the girl if she knows anything about a Keyzer Söze or Tony Montana. When she says no, he says "no... they are not in any registries."
Maybe this reference should be added.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.16.204.132 (talk) 22:03, 15 July 2009 (UTC) 

Hi there. I read this line in the article : "The French word "sosie" (pronounced sozy) means a person's double, or someone who closely resembles another person."
As a native french speaker, I struggle to see any relevance in this statement (in the context of the article). The word "sosie" comes from the name of a character in Plaute's play Amphitryon whose appearance is used by the god Mercury. Same thing in Molière's rewriting of the play. This gives to this word the meaning of "someone having the exact same appearance as someone else". The word has been used long before the movie, so I really can't see any relevance to the statement in the article. I thus allow myself to remove it. --Hregrin (talk) 07:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

In the 2010 A Team film, Jessica Biel's character is called Charissa Sosa. Her character is neither an invisible agent, nor is does she pretend to be something she is not. Any idea why she is called that? The film uses Annabelle Smith as a spoken clue to Hannibal Smith at one point in the film so the writer must have been well aware of phonetic links. 
St3f (talk) 07:59, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Other than the pop culture section (which is mostly worthless), and the unreferenced speculation, there is nothing said in this character article that is not already said in the film article.  I assert that the character is not notable enough to justify a separate article, and anything useful should be merged into the film article and this article deleted. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 23:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Though this is not my area of expertise, as it regards an area of "pop culture", I will offer this opinion:  This article is very well written, not overly verbose, and explains a character whose name has entered into various discourses -- I hear it periodically at gaming tables, with regard to feigned limping.
I believe it an interesting and informative article, and much better written (if not as societally important) than most on Wikipedia -- though acknowledging some of the structural issues and omissions raised by others.
Those wishing to improve should include further substantial material and referencing (surely a dissertation or two have been written on the movie!), could lay out alternative **substantial** interpretive speculations (understanding that the interpretive aspect of art history is both speculative and substantial, contrary to Jacobite's posting), and/or could try to shorten, moving redundant material to the movie page.
In short, improve it, don't remove this article -- don't heed encouragements from individuals unusually unappreciative of "pop culture" in wikipedia, a decidedly "pop" scholarly venue.
Meduban (talk) 21:47, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Meduban, the article currently contains redundant plot details from the film The Usual Suspects and has trivial popular culture mentions. Why do you think that the character cannot be covered at the film article? If we do find academic coverage related to the character, it will surely be in context of the film, since that is the only appearance the character has made. A separate character article is usually encouraged for those who have appeared in multiple works and thus transcend these works' articles. Erik (talk | contribs) 22:19, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

This has come back a few times. Am I missing some relevance of the Warcraft III cheat, or is this a textbook bad pop culture reference? There's been no wider impact to this cheat code existing, reliable sources haven't written about it, and - unlike the usage in the Max Payne and Buffy dialogue - it doesn't tell us anything about Keyser Söze's adoption in pop culture beyond "one Blizzard programmer saw the film and thought it would make a good, secret cheat code". It doesn't even trigger a Söze-like effect in the game! --McGeddon (talk) 15:38, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, I think it was some 18 months ago, when I added that reference. I have revisited this article now only to see I was by that time not the 1st one and that of course these references are gone. I must say, I find your judging of the relevancy of this reference disturbing. First, it is undisputable, that computer games are popular culture. It is undisputable, that Blizzard's Warcraft series has its relevant place among computer games. It is questionable, if the decision to use that specific cheat code has been done "by one Blizzard programmer" and I attribute that to speculation of yours. The specific effect of the cheat code - which I hereby testify exists - namely gaining a desired amount of gold, is as much Sözer-like effect as you can get in the game concept. I will not try to bring that reference back here, but IMHO it (and others, see editing history) should be at least part of "references". LinguistManiac (talk) 09:41, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
WP:IPCEXAMPLES is the yardstick by which these things are measured: if McQuarrie or Singer have commented on the existence of the Warcraft cheat, or if a reliable source has written about it in some depth, then there's something worth saying about it and it's fair game for Wikipedia. If they haven't, it's probably not worth mentioning. What does the reader gain from being told "this string was a cheat code in a 2002 videogame, we don't know who added it or why"? --McGeddon (talk) 10:07, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok, so if I understand WP:IPCEXAMPLES correctly, adding another section "Trivia" where this could be deployed is possible? I mean IMDB does that too. Much of it seems like trivia, but honestly this old version [3] has potentionally more interesting and valuable information (namely cross-references) in it, than the current one. Isn't WP also about the experience? When looking at the old revision, I feel animated to look up who Lord Infamous is and the like. Probably I would have learned something new. Now I haven't. LinguistManiac (talk) 21:42, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Which bit of IPCEXAMPLES do you mean? Catch-all WP:TRIVIA sections are discouraged in Wikipedia articles, since it's not a very helpful header - if it's pop culture stuff, just call it "In popular culture" so that the reader knows what to expect.
Randomly clicking around Wikipedia is great, but we still have to draw a line for what should and shouldn't be included. WP:RS is that line - Lord Infamous using Keyser Söze as a pseudonym might actually be okay (we'd check that by looking for sources where it's discussed; ideally we'd find a quote from him saying why he uses the name), but unless I'm missing some context, a videogame cheat code seems unremarkable, and the apparent lack of secondary sources backs that up. (Other Warcraft III cheat codes include "Point Break", "Synergy" and "All Your Base Are Belong To Us", but those don't get written up in the relevant articles, for the same reason.) --McGeddon (talk) 11:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm just too new to wiki, but I find it frustrating the citation of the Warcraft III cheat was removed. There's clearly some internal politics and content authoring mechanics that I am not privy too [yet] but in my opinion but it is a great example to show the penetration this fictional character had on other media. How you define Popular Culture clearly differs from me. I agree with the remarks made by LinguistManiac.Level9wizard (talk) 13:21, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I added a bunch of citations.  It wasn't really very difficult, but it was time consuming.  The prose isn't really my best work, but it gets the job done.  Especially in the "top ten" dump of citations, the sentences are a bit choppy and repetitive.  My first draft was even worse in this regard, but I quickly tired of trying to beautify it.  If nobody else does, I'll probably get around to rewriting it.  However, what I'd rather do is rewrite the first half of this page.  For one thing, it's split into two sections for no apparent reason.  Looking over the history of the page, it seems like this was originally done to conceal spoilers.  The film's plot is awkwardly split between these two sections, alternating between in-universe writing and commentary.  I propose we combine the two sections, remove the in-universe writing, and reduce the word count.  As it stands, there's ~750 words split between these two sections, which is more than most films get (WP:FILMPLOT recommends between 400-700 for an entire plot summary). 
Oh yeah, I also added a minor "in popular culture" note about a ska band named after the character.  I don't care if anyone removes it.  I just threw it in for completeness when it came up in my searches.  I tried to find better examples, but nobody really wants to talk about the cultural impact of The Usual Suspects/Keyser Soze, even though they invoke the name constantly.  Since I couldn't find any discussions, I tagged an assertion of such importance as needing a citation.  The alternative was to individually cite multiple examples of these happening, and I really didn't want to make another boring citation dump. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:18, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

If there's no opposition, then I'll combine the two sections tomorrow.  I figure a week is long enough for people to raise an objection. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:04, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 Done  It's still longer than I'd like, but I'm too tired of editing this article to care.  I've added ~25 citations, doubled the length of the page (which is admittedly due to using citation templates), and cleaned up most of the obvious problems.  I think I'm finished for now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:32, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

After fleshing out the lead a bit and adding some more sources, I think this article might be ready to be nominated for GA.  Is there anything major missing? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:36, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Keyser Söze/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Koustav Halder (talk · contribs) 17:31, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. I'll be reviewing this article to see if it meets the GA Article criteria. --  Koustav  talk to me!  17:28, 27 March 2016 (UTC)


### Comments
Lead
Kindly provide a suitable citation referring to the inspiration drawn from John List.Koustav Halder (talk) 17:31, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Per WP:LEADCITE, the lead doesn't need citations for content that's already cited elsewhere in the article.  @Koustav Halder: I'm not quite sure that your account is experienced enough to do a GA review. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:49, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
My bad, I mean it needs to be verified, later on in the Concept and Creation, this fact is not supported.
Link KGB Koustav Halder (talk) 18:06, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Link the phrase " make these accounts unreliable" to Unreliable Narrator ----Koustav Halder (talk) 02:05, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
"associated" or "synonymous" is more concise and clear cut than the phrase "a shorthand way to describe" ----Koustav Halder (talk) 02:49, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Concept & Creation
Kindly provide a reliable citation for sentence referring to John List --- Koustav  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koustav Halder (talk • contribs) 17:57, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
It looks like the Google Books URL in the body might have changed in the three years since I added it.  I corrected the link to be more specific, so that it points to the correct page in the book again.  It still worked, but it didn't point to correct page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:03, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
It looks like the Google Books URL in the body might have changed in the three years since I added it.  I corrected the link to be more specific, so that it points to the correct page in the book again.  It still worked, but it didn't point to correct page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:03, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
You could consider a better alternative citation for John List such as this. Koustav Halder (talk) 07:23, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

The book is a reliable source.  It's at least as reliable as a listicle, if not more. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
After some browsing I find this section still lacks considerable necessary information that should incorporated at the earliest.
For Instance consider: Spacey met Bryan Singer at a screening of the director's first feature, Public Access, which won the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance in 1993. Spacey liked the movie so much that he told Singer he wanted to be in whatever he made next.(ref ). Söze was written with Kevin Spacey in mind,(ref ) as McQuarrie was of the opinion  "he was lesser known at the time. I wanted the audience to dismiss him as a minor character.”(ref )

My point is this section needs to be expanded with more relevant information. A quick search threw up this much, detailed analysis should bring up more. Koustav Halder (talk) 07:41, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

This isn't a Featured Article, and it doesn't have to be comprehensive.  Per WP:WIAGA, it only has to address the main aspects.  The article already addresses most of this, but I can emphasize it.  I don't think where Spacey and Singer first met is a necessary information about the character Keyser Soze, but I suppose it's harmless to add. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Give the full form of lit. Koustav Halder (talk) 07:48, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Fictional History
Link "Customs Agent" (1st para) with United States Customs Service, "FBI" (1st para), "drawing" with facial composite (last para).
Link only "Devil", not "the Devil" (3rd para).
As per WP:QUOTE and MOS:FICT, you will need to provide a citation for the quote "The greatest trick......". The present citation (Ref 6) shows this quote has been paraphrased from the works of Charles Baudelaire. You need to provide a citation that shows this quote occurs in the movie.
The sentence "Neither McQuarrie nor Singer realized this at the time and included it after hearing others paraphrase the quotation" (3rd para) is irrelevant to this particular section. This should rather be kept as a note if not edited out.
"Cerebral palsy" (1st para) is highly specific. Most secondary sources I have encountered say Kint is either "disabled" or "limping" etc. Having taken occasion to go through the primary material, I find this is not explicitly  supported by the primary source either. This should either be replaced or a reliable source must be added to support this fact. The same applies to "paralysis" (last para).
Edit out "even" from the following sentence "Once his family is buried, Söze targets the Hungarian Mafia, their families, friends, and even people who owe them money" (2nd para).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koustav Halder (talk • contribs) 07:34, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
All of these are done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:45, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Reception/Legacy
Citations
Ref 16, Ref 17, Ref 20, Ref 21 are dead. Replace with suitable citations.
Acccording to Ref 22, Soze is ranked #41 not #69. Correct this.
Acccording to Ref 32, Soze has come to mean a "renowned figure who is feared but elusive -- someone everyone hears about but no one ever meets in person". There is no mention of Soze being apocryphal which means "of dubious authenticity". Correct this. Also replace "shorthand" as in the lead.Koustav Halder (talk) 07:42, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:45, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Capitalize 'von' (author's title) for ref 23. Koustav Halder (talk) 11:15, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
That name looks German, and they don't capitalize "von"; it's not capitalized in the newspaper's byline.  He also has a Wikipedia page, Richard von Busack, where it's not capitalized.  I think it's probably best not to capitalize it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:27, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Content
In the last sentence of the In popular culture section, the phrase "writer Russ Alan Prince asked what Söze would do" is awkward and vague. Replace with a better phrase or sentence supported by the source such as "writer Russ Alan Prince concludes that a number of the 'self-made super-rich' people would respond to these situations in the same manner as Keyser Söze".Koustav Halder (talk) 07:42, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:45, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Question: have there been any negative or mixed reviews of the character?Koustav Halder (talk) 06:53, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The film got negative reviews, most notably by Roger Ebert, but it's usually the twist ending that gets criticized.  One could argue that Keyser Soze is the twist ending, but that's an argument a reliable source would have to make.  There certainly are sources that say the film itself is overrated, but I've never seen any that say the character is. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:51, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Most of text in this section refers to the mid and long term impact of the character, judging by the sources. What about the immediate reception of the character, at the time this movie came out? You could add a few sources (the reviews of the movie might help) that illustrate this. A new sub-section dealing with this might additionally be created. Koustav Halder (talk) 01:51, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
There are already a few quotations from contemporary reviews, such as A. O. Scott.  I could add even more, but it would start turning into fluff – content added for the sake of expanding the article to an arbitrary size.  A GA doesn't have to be long or excessively detailed; it just has to satisfy the criteria of WP:WIAGA.  You're right that the article can expanded further, but I think it's already detailed enough to pass. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:36, 2 April 2016 (UTC)


### Final assessment
Pass. Good work in responding to various comments.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Does the lede need to be more explicit about the Kint/Söze reveal? There's nothing that says how the film reveals Kint to be Söze, so (for a reader who hasn't read the infobox caption) "Singer has said he believes Kint and Söze are the same person" comes out of nowhere. --McGeddon (talk) 17:33, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

That's a good point. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:15, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
I made it a bit more explicit, but I think the wording might be a little awkward. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Seems fine to me. Is "an alias of Keyser Söze" a bit strong, for the infobox, since we don't actually say this objectively anywhere else? --McGeddon (talk) 18:51, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
I never had a problem with it.  It seems the only way to describe the image.  If we don't say this, it's too confusing; how else can we explain why we're showing a picture of Verbal Kint in an article about Keyser Soze?  It's verifiable, even if it's not explicitly sourced: [4], [5], [6].  The last source, from Complex, is probably the most flatly explicit of them.  If a source is determined to be necessary, that's probably the one I would choose. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:35, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
"Kint is an alias of Soze" just seems bluntly at odds with the nuanced perspective that the article presently takes: that the "filmmakers have preferred to leave the character's nature to viewer interpretation", that the director has a belief but we don't know the writer's, and that a review has discussed the ambiguity of "whether he is Kint pretending to be Söze or the reverse". --McGeddon (talk) 12:22, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
If you can think of a better caption, we could use that.  Or I guess we could just call him "Verbal Kint" and have people read the lead to understand the context.  That seems less than ideal to me, but I guess it's workable. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:14, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
"Kevin Spacey's character Roger "Verbal" Kint is identified as Söze in a police sketch" would be closer to the lede text. --McGeddon (talk) 16:05, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Is the problem now the lede or the caption? I think the first paragraph's "Further events in the story make these accounts unreliable, and, in a twist ending, a police sketch identifies Kint's face as Söze." is more than sufficient, the second paragraph's "Singer has said he believes Kint and Söze are the same person." unnecessary, and the caption "Kevin Spacey as Roger "Verbal" Kint, an alias of Keyser Söze" awkward stylistically and potentially inaccurate, albeit not unexpected if one read the main text. I think "alias" is a loaded term, and I think it undisputed that Spacey played Kint. Even if he did play Soze, Soze in that scene is playing Kint, so it's just Spacey as Kint. JesseRafe (talk) 16:31, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Just the caption. The "believes Kint and Söze are the same person" quote seems important to clarify that the film's plot might be "Söze is arrested and lies about his identity" rather than "Kint is arrested and invents Söze as a character", but it's been a very long time since I've seen the film. --McGeddon (talk) 16:39, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Have gone ahead and changed the infobox caption to "Kevin Spacey's character Roger "Verbal" Kint is identified as Söze in a police sketch". --McGeddon (talk) 11:45, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Seems fine to me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:01, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

The infobox refers to Söze as Turkish, but the movie never clearly says so. Kint says Söze is "Supposed to be Turkish, some say his father is German". That's the only reference to Söze's nationality in the movie - uncertain at best.
Also, the movie doesn't say Söze started his "career" in his "native Turkey", as the article says. Tdunsky (talk) 15:16, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I was actually thinking about this exact issue the other day – I've added a note that his nationality is only alleged. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 15:37, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Keyser (Kaiser) Söze was portrayed by actors of Western origins, not Turkish. The character's background is intentionally mysterious and not explicitly defined in the movie. The name "Keyser" is not of Turkish origin and does not have any meaning in the Turkish language. Obviously being of mixed German and Turkish ancestry. Allo002 (talk) 20:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

It has been a while since this article has been reviewed, so I took a look and noticed lots of uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. While some are covered b MOS:PLOT, other paragraphs, including appearances in other media, are not. Should this go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 03:05, 16 November 2025 (UTC)