This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Cryptids category. |
|
This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why are what "appears" to be completely mythical creatures (and not really thought to exist by some individual today) in this list here.
Example of what should be here: Thunderbird (cryptozoology) which has almost zero possibility of being real, but not completely zero to all ... so the realm of this st and should be here. Please see this text I found directly in this article ...
This article deals with modern sightings of such a creature, reported as real, as opposed to clearly mythological accounts, though believers in the phenomenon often use the Indian legends as further evidence for their claims.
Example of what should not be here: Hellhound, which is purely mythological and does not belong in the list of potential Cryptids. Here is some text I found in that article ...
The myth is common across the UK, and many names are given to the apparitions: Black Shuck of East Anglia, Moddey Dhoo of the Isle of Man, Gwyllgi of Wales, and so on.
So, am I missing something in these articles here? 206.127.114.34 03:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC) Kracker
Just a suggestion, but a Cryptid is defined as "legendary creatures that are rumored or suspected to exist, but for which conclusive proof is still missing"...does this include God? And if so, I will edit it in. 84.12.21.251 21:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
No God would not be included because, in most religions, God is not a creature, and lacks a physical body. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.98.56.254 ( talk) 23:26, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Cryptids are not actual animals, but described animals from folklore and myth. Since no formal scientific classification exists, one must assume that these animals are "fictional" until discovered otherwise. Once they ARE discovered to be real, they are given a proper classification and are no longer cryptids. Case and point: Cryptids are fictional animals, so that's the subcategory they should fall under. Justin chat 08:44, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I laughed when I read this. That is arguably the most narrow-minded and skeptical claim I've seen all day. Elasmosaurus ( talk) 04:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm fairly sure that this inst all the cryptids and sub category's for cryptids. I am wondering as well why "Gilled Antalope" is under the pages category? If their is an answer I will revert it back to where it was, otherwise i'm going to see if I can move it to the "aquatic" or "mammal" category upon further research. - (MadDogObertt) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MadDogObertt ( talk • contribs) 03:13, 24 February 2020 (UTC)