Talk:Tasmanian Devil (Looney Tunes)

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Animation: American / Looney Tunes B‑class High‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by the Looney Tunes work group (assessed as High-importance).

Australia B‑class Low‑importance

	Australia portal Tasmanian Devil (Looney Tunes) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Fictional characters B‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

from wikipedia:village pump I want to do an article on the Tasmanian Devil cartoon character. There is already a page called Tasmanian devil that has a dummy link to a page called Tasmanian Devil cartoon character. I think that's a bit unintuitive. If someone wants to link to the cartoon character, they will most likely type in his name as it is officially written, Tasmanian Devil. The capitalized "Devil" keeps the link from going to the page about the real-world mammal. So, what should I call my article? I'd prefer Tasmanian Devil, but if y'all think this will make for to much ambiguation, I'll call it Tasmanian Devil cartoon character. -- Brian Smithson 6:24 (UTC) 3-22-03

IMO Tasmanian Devil is fine. For better or worse we aleady have quantum leap/Quantum Leap and red dwarf/Red Dwarf. --mav 07:06 Mar 22, 2003 (UTC)

IMHO, this is fine, BUT each page should have a disambig link to the other. jaknouse 01:55 Mar 23, 2003 (UTC)

Semi on-topic, earlier today, someone created an entry Tasmanian Devil about the cartoon character modelled on a Tasmanian Devil (Sarcophilus harrisii)), the entry for which (under Wikipedia's weirdo animal naming rules) has long been at Tasmanian devil. What should be done?

The first thing that should be done is to review the discussion that preceded the creation of the article. :)

(At the time of this writing, said discussion is on the Village pump page, about halfway up from this discussion.)

--Paul A 09:12 Mar 24, 2003 (UTC)

Ahh. I see. Thankyou Paul. Two comments: (a) It should have been mentioned on Talk:Tasmanian devil, so that interested people could stand a rough chance of finding it in the first place. (b) It's a really dumb way to name an article in this instance. The name of the animal is Tasmanian Devil (capital "D", see any field guide) and now we have an entry under the correct name of the animal about an ephermeral and subsiduary thing! Tannin 09:27 Mar 24, 2003 (UTC)

Actually, field guides tend to have it wrong. Talk to any biologist, and you'll be told that English names of organisms should always be in lower case unless one of the words is a proper noun, in which case only the proper noun should be capitalized, such as Tasmanian devil, or Virginia pine. There is, obviously, a gap here between accepted scientific usage and popular usage, but the point is that Tasmanian devil is correct as far as the scientific community goes. jaknouse 15:13 Mar 24, 2003 (UTC)

On the contrary: see Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (flora and fauna) for an extended list of examples. Tannin

This is silly. "Tasmanian Devil" is a proper noun since it is the name of a particular singular thing. "Tasmanian devil" is the name of a group of animals - it is not a proper noun. As is explained on the above talk page field guides are not good sources on capitalization. Published manuals of style are'. I've never seen Tasmanian devil or bald eagle etc capitalized as you suggest in any biology textbook, any dictionary or any other encyclopedia. The only sources that are doing things in a "really dumb way" are the field guides --mav

Seven hardcover volumes at $400 each and you are calling it a "field guide"? Hoolie Doolie! Tannin

end from wikipedia:village pump

In the article is the following:

Fossil evidence shows that Tasmanian Devils retained a place until around 600 years ago. (About 200 years before European colonisation.)

This implies that European colonisation of Australia began about 400 years ago, which is wrong; European exploration began then, but the earliest known colonisation was in 1788, only 215 years ago. The question is, which part is wrong: "around 600 years", "About 200 years", or both? :Securiger 07:30, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC) This has now been fixed... 600 years was correct, 200 years was wrong (according to the first page referenced by the article).

Bears No Resemblance?

The cartoon devil looks a great deal like the real thing, at least inasmuch as Bugs Bunny looks like a rabbit. Why there are so many references to the cartoon devil looking nothing like a real one is beyond me!

It's possibly because he is most often seen bipedal(on two feet) and that he is only brown and tan, while real Devils have other markings. But other than that, he's fine. Also, sign your post by doing four tildes. Mumblebot (talk) 17:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does "only real" resemblance mean? It's POV, considering that Taz isn't actually real.

They're trying to say "the only resemblance that isn't debatable" or "the only resemblance that isn't a stretch"

However I think that's way wrong, Taz looks a great deal like a tasmanian devil (as looney tunes characters go), and someone should really take time to sit down and analyze that thoroughly and remove these unfair "looks nothing like the real thing" comments. perhaps we should just put a picture of a real devil next to it and be done with it 67.176.160.47 (talk) 21:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Video Game

Anyone remember the Atari video game? Was it just "Taz" or "Tazmania?" It would be relevant to mention it here. --feitclub 18:54, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Achilles heel vs nemesis

I don't think AH is right. An AH is an apparently minor weakness in a powerful person (or thing) that leads directly to their downfall. Mrs Taz is a) not minor; b) not in Taz but separate from him; c) not the direct cause of Taz's downfall. I'd argue for "but Taz's romantic feelings for her still prove to be his Achilles heel..."

that whole thing doesn't sound right, i'll fix it. 67.176.160.47 (talk) 21:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Latest cuts

I put back some of what was cut in the latest flurry of edits. Some of the edits didn't make sense (talking about Setzer's hatred of the character before even talking about his first cartoon), and others just seemed like they were trying to change what were in my opinion more interesting words for more common ones just for the sake of being common. I can buy some of the changes that were made on POV basis, but the ones I put back in don't strike me as particularly POV. I hope this is a reasonable compromise between my original phrasings and what y'all had changed to. Amcaja 21:08, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tasmanian Government?

Can someone provide a source for the bit about the Tasmanian Government? If no one does, I'm removing that section. -- Amcaja 03:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think it's safe to remove it, after two years.... Mumblebot (talk) 17:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More information

Back in the 1990's there were toys of characters in halloween costumes (Taz was a superhero/knight) also in the thrid movie in the Aladdin series Taz is referenced to.--Cooly123 15:04, 28 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs)

She-Devil

Tasmanian She Devil redirects here, either she should get her own article, or more should be mentioned here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.160.47 (talk) 21:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taz-mania

Not a single mention/relation to that show? I don't know much about it, but came here looking for information, and had to return to google to find the name of it. Could more info be added please? I'll add at least a sentence, but I suggest making it a section between Looney Tunes and more current stuff, seeing as it was a 3 season show based upon him... JeopardyTempest (talk) 18:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Untrue claims regarding the Down Syndrome Society

The claims in this article related to the Down Syndrome Society of SA and Judy Opolski (Taz and Developmental Disabilities) are totally false and the quoted statement was never made. I don't know why anyone would bother to make this up, but I'd be grateful if someone could remove this entire section (which you'll see, is unsurprisingly unreferenced). 60.242.79.160 (talk) 16:31, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did it myself. I've left the other claims in this section for someone else to either reference or remove. 60.242.79.160 (talk) 16:48, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]