Talk:Emil Dechebal Matasareanu

This article shouldn't exist

I still think this article shouldn't exist. Emil is a nobody, and there is no content here anyway. Details of the North Hollywood shootout belong in that article. If the event was bigger and more complex then maybe there should be something about it here, but barring that then at most it should note he was one of the two involved. However, I don't care for the conflict and Wikipedia isn't exactly suffering from this. 70.66.9.162 13:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

The only thing that makes Emil relevant is his relation to the shootout, which has already been addressed. Had his criminal career been more sustained, or had he achieved notoriety prior to the shootout, there would be a case for a separate article. As it stands, this is simply not the case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurtfetherolf (talk • contribs) 20:22, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Neutrality

I don't feel that the neutrality of this article is in question. It explains who Emil was, why he's important, and includes a few facts about him. There is nothing I can see on the page that is biased. :\ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 163.153.222.110 (talk) 16:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

This is relevant

This article is relevant. If the history channel can do a special about this incident then there can be a page about it on Wikipedia.

Lookalike

This guy looks so much like a heavier Edward Furlong ... 68.43.111.52 10:01, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

name with diacritics

Shouldn't his birth name be included? It's "Emil Decebal Mătăsăreanu" with diacritics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.105.136.92 (talk) 23:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Emil Dechebal Matasareanu had epilepsy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.92.236.71 (talk) 15:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Matasareanu.jpg

Image:Matasareanu.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Emil Dechebal Matasareanu/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

It is amazing how different this guy looks after just four years. Even his ears are different - someone might pay attention at his lobulus.

Last edited at 09:19, 24 October 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 14:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)