Video games based on Slender Man was nominated for
deletion.
The discussion was closed on 6 April 2024 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were
merged into
Slender Man. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see
its history; for its talk page, see
here.
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Slender Man article. This is
not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Do not use this space to post suggestions as to which fictional characters, memes or folklore figures you think inspired the Slender Man. The only person who can answer those questions is the man who created him, Eric Knudsen. Unless word comes from him, or from a VERY reliable source, such speculation is meaningless and falls under
WP:NOTFORUM.
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or
poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see
this noticeboard.
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Folklore, a
WikiProject dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the topics of
folklore and
folklore studies. If you would like to participate, you may edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
project's page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to
discussion.FolkloreWikipedia:WikiProject FolkloreTemplate:WikiProject FolkloreFolklore articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in
film,
literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
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
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the
Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
My main concern is reliable sourcing (2b) and due weight in the "References in media" section, where the listings seem to include every media reference regardless of importance, and include unsourced statements, primary sources, and fanwiki sources.
Besides that, the article structure is unorthodox. The "History" L2 contains the entirely-unrelated-to-history "Description" L3. "Folkloric qualities", "Copyright", and "References in media" are all at least unusual L2 headings. ~
A412talk! 16:16, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Restructured. As for the media section, how does one decide which inclusion is worthy? Serendipodous 19:04, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the improvements to the article structure.
Regarding the media section, it's an essay, but
WP:IPCEXAMPLES is a good guide on this stuff, and basically says that the work should be significant, the mention should be significant, and that the mention should have been noted by reliable sources. ~
A412talk! 20:24, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Concretely going through a couple examples from the article, if that helps:
Minecraft Endermen: This one is probably fine, as a significant element of a popular game, but ideally we'd have better sourcing than igxpro.com, which appears to be a blog reposting social media speculation.
[1][2]
Lost Girl: This one is fine, seems to be a major element of a popular television episode, sourced to RS.
"Sympathy for Slender Man": This one's very shaky. A filler short; the cited source doesn't actually say anything other that hosting the short.
My Little Pony: This isn't a significant mention. As the text indicates, it is a "brief cameo". ~
A412talk! 20:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
+Article doesn't even have reception section; which is important for every fictional character articles. Same issue with
Michael Myers.
GreenishPickle! (
🔔) 22:14, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
This article is extremely outdated. At least four academic works (Chess and Shira, Peck, Asimov, Slender Man is Coming) dedicated to Slender Man exist, none of whose content are adequately covered in the article. — VORTEX3427 (
Talk!) 00:55, 1 April 2024 (UTC)reply
A "reception" section would have been easier ten years ago. Nowadays the Slender Man is a forgotten and discredited meme tied forever to an act of senseless violence. Serendipodous 15:41, 31 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Then the references in media title should be renamed as "In popular culture". Also, that section shouldn't be written like that. Article a little bit outdated as it seems? and there are still unsourced claim.
GreenishPickle! (
🔔) 22:46, 31 March 2024 (UTC)reply
What unsourced claims? And outdated in what way? Also, while your sources do make the connection between slenderman and enderman, igxpro is the only one that explains how the connection was made. Serendipodous 23:39, 31 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I see that you have rewritten it. Looks good now. There are still some cn tags at development section and it might need a bit expansion I think; the quote in history sec seems to be a bit messy? Also, try removing citations on the lead and cite it in the body.
GreenishPickle! (
🔔) 01:33, 1 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Vortex3427:, @
Greenish Pickle!:, could you please sort your comments? There seem to be a couple threads here, but they're all broken up between indents. ~
A412talk! 01:30, 1 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I just felt like some were not covered yet (like what Voltrex said) for such a popular character like this, but for now, my concerns were from the history section that I replied to above. I'll leave it to Vortex since he is more familiar with this than I am as a video game character editor.
GreenishPickle! (
🔔) 01:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The issues I raised (bloated, poorly sourced "References in media" / IPC section), and section organization, are resolved to my satisfaction. I don't know about the outdatedness concerns. ~
A412talk! 23:21, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Maybe the folklore qualities should be renamed "reception"? and then moved it into the last section. I also feel like it should be expanded more with scholar sources. 🥒
Greenish Pickle!🥒 (
🔔) 12:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
If we were going to call it reception I would have to split it, since it isn't all about reception. And reception by whom? The parents of Waukesha, Wisconsin? I also think it is where it needs to be, because the idea that it's folklore should be above the fact that it is not public domain. As for more sources, well, there's a book apparently. Almost everyone in said book is already cited in the article, but if you want it, I suppose I could buy it. I'm not exactly rolling in cash, does anyone want to go halvsies on it? Serendipodous 13:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I see. Hmm. Then the remaining issues for you would be to fix the refencing issues and add authors like ref 66 and ref 67 then replace the ref 71 into better one. After that I don't have problem with article keeping its GA status. 🥒
Greenish Pickle!🥒 (
🔔) 22:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
