Talk:Pazuzu

message: Why aren't the television references considered 'notable'?  They've been removed repeatedly from this entry. [was unsigned, but by User:Troublekit]
no called or yes called kill you!!!!!!!
: Television references for just about any topic are almost always unnotable unless the topic of the piece is specifically about television. Notability for an article has to be something that's significant for the overall topic, not just trivia of no real importance. Authors of fiction (TV, movies, videogames, RPGs, short stories, novels, etc. etc.) often lift characters out of myth and legends... If we listed them all pretty much all of the articles would be filled with a couple paragraphs of actual facts about a topic and then 6 billion references to fiction. Unless there's something special about a fictional reference (and the Exorcist movie qualifies, as it was world-famous and heavily featured Pazuzu by plot and image) there's no reason at all to list it here. Futurama characters with the same name but not having any real relationship to the actual character, the fact that D&D adapts it as a monster (they adapt EVERYTHING, so what?), and so forth and so on has no actual useful knowledge content to someone reading this article. 
: And, as a matter of fact, looking at the page I think I need to remove more of the fictional references that are currently there. DreamGuy 06:04, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
:: After thinking about it, I decided to make a disambiguation page that had some of them, like is done with a lot of other aticles. DreamGuy 12:24, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
::: All right.  It just seemed very arbitrary. Troublekit 07:34, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, like a 'trivia' section is on here, which I think has been considered unencyclopedic and they are supposed to be integrated into articles, or removed.Merkinsmum 22:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Television References 

message: Please tell me this is vandalism. blahpers 18:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not too sure about it, but i hope some passer-by expert of Babylonian mythology will clean up this article soon. 82.58.169.151 07:45, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burnt hair-smelling testicular excretions? 

message: I changed it to northeastern wind, as per the excellent link to a PDF section of a scholarly work below on the page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.205.234.13 (talk) 08:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  wind 

message: The article is very confusing in these terms. It goes back and forth between the terms. To my knowledge Pazuzu is a demon employed against Lamashtu, but is not worshipped and has no temples or places of worship.
Xuchilbara (talk) 05:51, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  god? demon? what? 

message: This band called Behemoth that I'm obsessed with has a song called Pazuzu. They are really into the mythology stuff and I went on here to Wikipedia to look and what some of the things they include in their lyrics mean. They mention things like Asmodeus (where I got my name) Which is a demon, and Belial, and other cryptic things like that. So Pazuzu cought my intrest.Don't know to much about it but it seems cool ^.^
Asmodeus90 (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 03:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pazuzu in the Music world 

message: I thought The Exorcist had a big connection to Pazuzu. Either I was wrong, or Wiki has decided (in its infinite wisdom) to purge all cultural references from the article. Oh well. Thanks, guys. --142.177.109.104 (talk) 01:41, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What 

message: As Pazuzu is the brother of Humbaba (who interacted with Gilgamesh), surely the claim that " "Likewise, the demon Pazuzu does not appear in myth until Assyria's rise in the first millennium B.C., long after Sumer's prime ... Thus the beings of the Simon Necronomicon bear little resemblance to either Sumerian myth or Lovecraftian fiction." " is erroneous? I'm going to be bold and remove it.
Desdinova (talk) 19:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That is what is said of Pazuzu in the Simon Necronomicon, and while it is erroneous in the context of the Pazuzu described in Assyrian and Babylonian myth, it should not be deleted simply because of that, especially since we're merely presenting what the Simon Necronomicon says about Pazuzu, and not presenting it as though it were an authority about Pazuzu.  That, and the Simon Necronomicon makes the claim that Pazuzu is of Sumerian origin, while we also mention the critics of the Simon Necronomicon, which point out the errors made by the author of the Simon Necronomicon.--Mr Fink (talk) 19:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  The edit wasn't designed to either verify or disprove the Simon Necronomicon, it was to state that Pazuzu, like his brother, was written in the Epic of Gilgamesh in C2100B.C., so the claim of the 'first millennium B.C' by the listed critics in the article is incorrect.  Desdinova (talk) 10:20, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fair enough.--Mr Fink (talk) 15:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Modern Culture - Doubts of Sumerian Origin? 

message: How can a statue - or anything for that matter - appear in an unmade video? PurpleChez (talk) 14:44, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: By being drawn into the storyboard.  Either way, given as how Rhinestone Eyes' page makes no mention of Pazuzu, it's unworthy of being mentioned in the article, let alone given a link.  That, and we need not make the section a fancruft-infested "spot the prop of the week" laundry list.--Mr Fink (talk) 15:03, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gorillaz 

message: I believe Professor Farnsworth had a pet gargoyle named Pazuzu. Not important enough for me to go and look it up now, though... --BjKa (talk) 10:11, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: He does, and "in-name only" mentions of characters sharing the same name are not notable.--Mr Fink (talk) 14:36, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed. That Pazuzu is not this Pazuzu. DarkKnight2149 14:58, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Futurama]] 

message: "legend of fire spirits" and "Magickal Mystical Creatures" mentiones Pazuzu as a kind of Jinn. On the other hand, a lot of deities with pagan origin were reinterpretated by muslims as Jinn (like aisha qandisha). Thus can this pazuzu be categorized as "Jinn"?--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 21:40, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  category Jinn (Genii)? 

message: Pazuzu is a main character in the first story of The Simpsons episode "treehouse of horror xxviii" Mortice (talk) 00:17, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a spoof of "The Exorcist," and not terribly notable.--Mr Fink (talk) 02:07, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simpsons reference