Talk:Steve Buscemi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

Steve Buscemi is part of WikiProject Fire Service, which is building a comprehensive and detailed guide to the fire service around the world. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project.

Contents 1 Stabbing 2 Pronunciation 3 Steve Buscemi Effect 4 Pulp finction 5 Unencyclopaedic

[edit] Stabbing

I know that Buscemi was stabbed several times in April 2001 when he was involved in a bar fight. Vince Vaughn was present and was arrested. I was wondering if someone could put some information regarding this incident in the article? (The SmokingGun.com has Vaughn's mugshots from the night in question). MagicBez 17:00, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I believe this was during the filming of the John Travolta vehicle Domestic Distrubance. He, Vaughn and the screenwriter, Scott Rosenberg, got into a bar fight with a local, Timothy Fogerty, at the Firebelly Lounge in Wilmington, North Carolina. Buscemi tried to break up the fight but ended up getting stabbed for his trouble. I think I remember hearing about it because Buscemi was supposedly stabbed in the head, throat, and arm. He now has a scar on his cheek that is covered up by makeup. --YoungFreud 14:19, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Buscemi Stabbed, Vaughn Jailed After Bar-Room Brawl Date: 14th April 2001

RESERVOIR DOGS (1992) star STEVE BUSCEMI is in hospital, and SWINGERS (1996) star VINCE VAUGHN in jail after a bar-room brawl at the FIREBELLY LOUNGE in Wilmington, North Carolina.

Buscemi had joined Vaughn and screenwriter SCOTT ROSENBERG at the bar during a break from filming JOHN TRAVOLTA's new movie DOMESTIC DISTURBANCE (2001).

Wilmington local TIMOTHY FOGERTY, 21, has been arrested and charged with assault with a deadly weapon after he allegedly stabbed Buscemi in the head, throat and arm in the early hours of yesterday morning (12APR01).

The FARGO (1996) star was taken to New Hanover Regional Hospital in critical condition and was later discharged and flown to New York.

Sources on the set of the movie claim, despite initial concerns, Buscemi's injuries were minor and the actor is expected back on the set on Monday (16APR01). Police say the fight broke out around 2.30 a.m local time, after Fogerty had made comments about wanting to "slice someone."

OFFICER CRYSTAL WILLIAMSON says, "From what witnesses say, he provoked the fight." Williamson says that when Buscemi, Vaughn and Rosenberg were leaving, the fight broke out. Vaughn, 31, and Rosenberg, whose credits include CON-AIR (1996) and the new SPIDER-MAN (2002) movie, were arrested and held on $600 (£400) bail. Both are due in court in June (01). (KL/WN/NFA)

The man accused of stabbing actor STEVE BUSCEMI made his first appearance in New Hanover County District Court, America, on Monday (16APR01) - charged with cutting the actor's head, throat and arm in a bar fight last week.

TIMOTHY WILLIAM FOGERTY, 21, appeared before JUDGE JOHN CARROLL who did not adjust the $50,000 (£33,000) bail bond which Fogerty paid on Friday (13APR01).

Fogerty waived his right to court-appointed counsel. He has hired Wilmington lawyer BILL PEREGOY to represent him on the charge of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill, inflicting serious injury.

Actor VINCE VAUGHN, screenwriter SCOTT ROSENBERG, and KENNETH ROBERT PURGASON of Wilmington were charged with affray, a misdemeanour, in the incident. All are free on bail.

A warrant on Vaughn was issued Monday on a misdemeanour assault charge. The charge alleges Vaughn struck a man standing by, but not involved in the melee. (SVD/WN/RP)

[edit] Pronunciation

is his name pronounced BYU-SEMI or BYU-SKEMMY i say SEMI

I've heard BYU-SHEMI as well

Buscemi is Italian, so it's BU-SHEMI

How about the film "Ned and his Dead Mother." Not sure what the date is on that one.

Well.. A friend and I have this argument I say it's Buu-sem-ee She sayd Buu-shemi. I've read it's the way I say it.. but she wont accept that shes wrong.

Buscemi pronounced his name as boo-SEM-mee on The Simpsons. --(trogga) 23:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Steve Buscemi Effect

I've removed this text, which was uncited:

Buscemi is also the inspiration for the "Steve Buscemi effect", a phenomenon where an actor who does not fit the traditional image of a hearthrob (see George Clooney) is nevertheless considered to be one because of percieved personality or acting talent.

because I can't find any references to it on the web. If you have a print reference, please feel free to add it with a citation. -- Mikeblas 16:54, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I think the first sentence says it best when it says "character actor". Calling someone a particularly beloved character actor needs sources, and naming an effect after him is bound to be NPOV or original research. -- Ianiceboy 05:10, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pulp finction

I don't remeber a role in pulp finction...

He was the Buddy Holly waiter at Jack Rabbit Slim's. Pumpkingrrl 03:13, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unencyclopaedic

Come on... 'Buscemi's sexiest role is....'. What does one have to do to get such unencyclopaedic nonsense removed without morons reverting you because they think all IPs removing text must be vandals? 81.179.243.112 21:12, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Please read WP:ATTACK and WP:CIV. Beyond that, please read the article before you rant. That line has not been restored. The very valid line about the theater group he is associated with was restored. IrishGuy ^talk 21:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Have you any idea how frustrating it is to come up against some editor who uses 'popups' to revert everything you do no matter what it is? It would drive a saint to rude words, especially when that person doesn't bother to explain anything, just uses completely undescriptive edit summaries. It took me an amazing amount of effort to get you even to concede this one sentence. Now you're still restoring some utterly irrelevant information about how he cut his hand in 2001. Why? 81.179.243.112 21:33, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I support IrishGuy's decision to restore relevant points. Making personal attacks will not get you anywhere except from being blocked. --Tim1988 ^talk 21:52, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Why do you support it? I would have thought that continually re-inserting unencyclopaedic information would be the blockable offence - apparently not. Point by point:

(In Fargo, Buscemi is shot in the face with a revolver, later to be fed into a woodchipper). In each Coen movie he has appeared, his remains have been smaller than in the previous film. - first sentence is redundant with what has already been explained. The second is just mind-bogglingly ridiculous and patently unworthy of inclusion. Even if you could find a reference, it's a stupid, irrelevant fact that illustrates nothing at all about Steve Buscemi.

It does, however, illustrate a theme within his work with the Coens. IrishGuy ^talk 22:32, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the first part of the paragraph, that I left, does that. The second part is redundant as I say. Care to offer your opinion on the last part?

[1] - why is this link in the text at all, with no explanation or context?

Then give it context. Why is your solution to everything just removing things? IrishGuy ^talk 22:32, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

How can I give it context? I've got no idea why it's there. There is no place in Wikipedia for a bare link like that so what's wrong with removing it? If you want to keep it, the onus is on you to make clear the reason for it being there.

In April 2001, while shooting the film Domestic Disturbance in Wilmington, North Carolina, Buscemi was cut while intervening into a bar fight between his friend Vince Vaughn, screenwriter Scott Rosenberg, and a local man, Timothy Fogerty, who allegedly instigated the brawl.[2] - so what? Why is this one incident so important? I'm sure Steve Buscemi has cut himself lots of times. This fact is utterly unimportant. 81.179.243.112 22:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

This is not unimportant. He was stabbed during a bar fight. Vaughn was arrested and Buscemi was hospitalized. Injuries and legal run-ins are often added to biographies. IrishGuy ^talk 22:32, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The article doesn't say the he was stabbed or hospitalised. Where are you getting that information from? Don't you think you should add it to the article, with a source, and don't you think, then, that this is not actually 'trivia'? 81.179.243.112 22:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Basic research is all it takes [3], [4]. Deletion shouldn't be the first option. IrishGuy ^talk 22:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

So why did you simply revert? Why didn't you do the basic research and enhance the article? If you had, quite obviously I would not have been able to remove any unencyclopaedic material because you would have solved the problem. It really doesn't matter if I delete anything, it's all in the article history. However, what I hope is that removing unencyclopaedic content should encourage the creation of more encyclopaedic content. Instead it seems over-zealous hotheads like to use fancy revert tools to restore rubbish, because they can't be bothered to improve the content and just like to pick fights with anonymous editors, driven by the certainty that they, with their oh-so-descriptive username, must automatically prevail over someone who edits from an IP address. 81.179.243.112 22:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Enough with the personal attacks. You claim that what you are doing isn't against policy so I show you the policy. You do it again anyway. You claim that what you remove isn't true, so I show you more evidence. You do it again anyway. You get more rude and more abusive with each edit. IrishGuy ^talk 22:52, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

You haven't listened to anything I've said. You started by assuming I was a vandal, and I've become increasingly frustrated by your thick headed refusal to consider that you might not be right to keep on reverting. I've shown you the policy I am following - you've chosen to take it that the policy says 'never remove trivia', quite the opposite of what it says. You have conspicuously failed to discuss, you just keep on reverting again and again and again. 81.179.243.112 22:57, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I have discussed this with you on three user talk pages as well as this one. The policies have been laid out for you and yet you willfully ignore them on your deleting rampage. You are vandalising articles. Please stop. IrishGuy ^talk 23:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)