Talk:Claus von Bülow

message: I added an interesting story by Alan Dershowtiz in the trials section. I think it best fits in that section as it pertains directly toward Bülow's innocence. However, it could be in the Pop-Culture section. Thoughts?  KamelTebaast 17:26, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dershowitz-Mailer story 

message: Look, I am a Klaus, and it's not uncommon for this mistake... just always knew it w/ a K and not the C... so... if there is a way to verify this, I think it should be.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsgncr8or (talk • contribs) 16:10, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: If you had been alive when all this happened, or bothered to look at the article's references, you wouldn't have needed to come here with this question.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.18.208 (talk) 15:36, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are we sure it is "Claus" and not "Klaus" 

message: Can other editors please weigh in as to whether they feel this link is sufficient to establish significance for the following pop culture item: "On 13 September 1997, shortly after the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, von Bülow made an extended appearance on a special edition of the live British television discussion programme After Dark, alongside among others Beatrix Campbell, Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie and George Monbiot." Thank you! DonIago (talk) 18:22, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pop culture item 

message: I see User:Doniago does not accept that a major feature film entirely about the subject of this article is "significant". That is if I have correctly read the comment that a review by one of USA's leading film critics does not "establish significance".
Alternatively it may be that Doniago feels this particular review isn't sufficient, in which case a quick Google will establish that the same film reviewed by Roger Ebert was reviewed by hundreds, if not thousands, of others all around the world. 
Alternatively it may be that Doniago considers the film itself to be of dubious significance, in which case I suggest first arguing that particular case at the film's article (Reversal_of_Fortune) before coming here.
Yet Doniago allows the reference to the previous entry (Klaus Baudelaire from A Series of Unfortunate Events is named after Claus von Bülow). However that reference itself contains the sentence "The story later became a film: Reversal of Forture" (so presumably, to be consistent, Doniago would accept the film into the list of popular culture references if the citation was to this source rather than to a film review by Roger Eberts, which seems odd)
Or it may be - I see the comment by Doniago on a tv programme, above - that Doniago does not want films and tv shows to be listed as "popular culture" in which case please explain. As I understand all copyright works are their own references, so this would be a strange position to hold.
Doniago seems to have much more experience of wikipedia than I do so I would be grateful for an explanation. In the meantime I have returned the film to the list, as it seems ridiculous without it.95.150.63.28 (talk) 11:15, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: A film review does not suffice as a reference per WP:IPCV. Pop culture references must be supported by sources that establish that the reference is in some manner significant. A film review is not a sufficient source because we would expect film reviewers to review films. What should be provided is a source that discusses the film in some manner other than a standard review. I hope this is clear enough. In the meantime, as discussed at WP:BRD, please do not reinsert information when you have been reverted unless/until you have a clear consensus in favor of doing so. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 14:14, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Films and tv 

message: I'm a little confused. the article says:
In 1979, he was convicted of, but later acquitted of... 
and:
In 1982, Bülow was arrested and tried for the attempted murders of... 
Am I missing something? That's reads pretty backward, as if it's written by 2 different people who don't agree.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB19:8679:E400:F048:C949:F305:4C50 (talk) 15:49, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  When was he arrested, tries etc? Confusing dates.