Talk:Chupacabra

Chupacabra captured "Prince Chupa"

[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.28.185.126 (talk) 06:59, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

A possible sighting occurred around June 1, 2012 near Austin, Texas. Check www.ynn.com news archives. It includes photos of the "creature." Speculation was that as a result of the drought coyotes and other wild animals were searching for water and possibly suffered from skin diseases, but the photos are interesting to see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.45.160.92 (talk) 04:31, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

CHOTACABRA HOAX = CHUPACABRA MYTH

ENGLISH: http://forgetomori.com/2007/criptozoology/chupacabras-in-the-bible-the-chotacabras/

Coleman also mentions the birds called “goatsuckers” in Spanish, of the Caprimulgiformes order, which means literally goat-sucker in Latin. According to Mexican researcher Luis Ruiz Noguez work on the Chupacabras, those birds are indeed called popularly goatsuckers in Spanish, but the actual term used is “Chotacabras”.

“Choto” or “Chota” is the name given to the goat offspring when it’s sucking milk, and the popular (and erroneous) legend is that these birds are able to open their beaks so wide they could suck milk not only from goats, but from cows as well.

But the relationship between the Chotacabras birds and the Chupacabras is more interesting than a mere similarity of names and alleged behaviour, because the main promoter of the Chupacabras in 1995 was also involved on one Chotacabras case some years before.

In 1989, Puerto Rican Jorge J. Martín promoted the case of a bird with snake-like fangs allegedly found and captured by relatives of María Ortiz Hernández while they were fishing. It was promoted as the “serpent-bird of Gurabo“, and if you may wonder where such chimera idea would have come from, you just have to read how it was immediately related to the Quetzalcoatl legend.

Much was made of the creature, which was available for examination, until one policeman visited the house where it was preserved, grabbed the creature and removed its fangs. They were merely parts from the feet of a rooster, attached to a common bird’s beak.

Perhaps more importantly to our post here, the bird was a chotacabras.

So, as Noguez pointed out, you can add the “serpent-bird of Gurabo” hoax involving a Chotacabras to the predecessors of the Chupacabras mania that swept the world around ten years ago. According to the Mexican researcher, the term “Chupacabras” is a simplistic and erroneous use of the more widely known term Chotacabras.Lillith90 (talk) 10:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Elsner2010, 17 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} Request to add information to the "History" section of the Chupacabra page;

Please update section with recently discovered information, because it is relevant to the origin of the legend.\

The following edit is submitted for inclusion in the "History" section, with sources cited (sources marked with "(A)", "(B)", "(C)", etc..):

"New information from researcher Benjamin Radford(A) in 2010 revealed that Madelyne Tolentino, the original eyewitness, had described a creature she had recently seen in the science-fiction horror film Species as the chupacabra.(B) The alien in the film, named Sil, is nearly identical to Tolentino’s chupacabra eyewitness account: “It was a creature that looked like the chupacabra, with spines on its back and all….The resemblance to the chupacabra was really impressive,” Tolentino reported.(C) Radford revealed that Tolentino “believed that the creatures and events she saw in Species were actually happening in reality in Puerto Rico at the time,” and therefore concludes that “The popular image of the chupacabra—the one appearing on thousands of books, magazines, and Web sites as a credible eyewitness description—is in fact based on a science fiction film.”(B) This, Radford believes, seriously undermines the credibility of the chupacabra as a real animal."

Sources:

(A) Wikipedia Page for Mr. Radford;  ; Mr. Radford's Website;

(B) Radford, Benjamin. 2010. Scientific Paranormal Investigation: How to Solve Unexplained Mysteries. ISBN 978-0-936455-11-2.

(C) Corrales, Scott. Chupacabras: And Other Mysteries. ISBN 1883729068 Elsner2010 (talk) 21:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Done Thanks, Stickee (talk) 00:24, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Sigbin

To David: the parts I added are uncited because they have plenty of citations in their respective articles. Do note that BOTH the Sigbin and the Peuchen were linked to the article before I did my edits. I only expanded the relationship with a few sentences. The Philippines was also a Spanish colony and shared much of cryptozoological myths and legends with Latin America (and much of the same superstition). --Obsidi♠n^Soul 13:47, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit semi-protected request

{{Edit semi-protected}} I think that they should add an image of the photographed Chupacabra corpse becaus. File:1Chupacabra photo.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by TXMocke (talk • contribs)

Not done: No such file exists. -Atmoz (talk) 20:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Mtoro5791, 13 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} There has been a recent siting of the Urban chupacabra in Bogota Colombia. Recent attacks include small children, as the urban chupacabra does not indulge in small farm animals. Furthermore, the marine chupacabra has also striked in the gulf of Morrosquillo as well as in ponds and lakes of cordoba. These attacks have been intently focused on marine life,however it is probable that the marine chupacabra may expand its horizons to eat mammals such as human beings. Mtoro5791 (talk) 03:43, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Link please, preferably to a news article. Musings on what 'its' intentions are are unacceptable, I'm afraid.--Obsidi♠n^Soul 03:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 05:53, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Chupacabra in Piner, Kentucky

Pretty sure we saw this creature while sitting outside last night. Piner, Kentucky is in northern Kentucky. 69.171.171.103 (talk) 04:51, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I would like to see a section added for 'other stories,' or 'local perspectives.' In my hometown of Holyoke, MA in the U.S., the story goes that the Chupacabra was a governmental experiment into genetic engineering gone wrong - a pair of laboratory animals are said to have escaped into the wild, where they began breeding and spreading across the world, mutating into several different forms as they encountered new enviornments. There are said to be aquatic versions and flying versions as well as the reptilian and dog-like ones. The stories people tell locally are just as interesting and important to document as the ones that garner national media attention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.205.135.184 (talk) 16:25, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

A little young and/or naive to be posting on here, aren't you? SHFW70 (talk) 00:30, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

In 1994 we were driving in central Baja California on a long, straight dirt road off of Highway one. Along a particularly featureless and flat section, we passed what appeared to be a mummified goat (teeth exposed in a horrible grin) propped up at the side of the road, just off the road. After driving on about a mile, we flagged down our friends driving just ahead of us, and the first thing they asked was "do you want to go back to photograph the goat?". I said yes and we drove back. The goat was gone. The desert in this area was flat and there was no cover for the goat or anyone manipulating a goat carcass to hide. We spent twenty minutes trying to find the goat, up and down the highway for several miles past where we first saw it. It was gone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.215.115.31 (talk) 21:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Grammatical Errors

There are a number of grammatical errors in this article that could be fixed, as well as sentences that could be combined to improve fluency. Also, this article seems very biased against the possibility of Chupacabras actually existing. New species are discovered every day, so why does anything with a mythological history or anything that evolutionists claim is extinct get shot down by most people? Hawkrawkr (talk) 20:22, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I reckon its because most individuals in current times are feeble minded and shortsighted brainwashed cronies. The majority of crypto creatures that are alleged to be in exsistence are in exsistence and have credentials reinforcing that all over the evidence that these evolutionists find. The only reason why there considered mythical is because the idea of a creature looking like how the chupacabra or bigfoot appear in reports is difficult to explain in the ecosystems and enviroments they are thought to be dweling in. That however is there only logical argument and is hogwash when compared to every thing else that is being unearthed about these creatures every day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.121.62.133 (talk) 14:51, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 184.146.158.107, 12 June 2011

Please change the main photo for this page, as it's extremely incorrect and leads many people to believe that this is some kind of alien being. i have provided several links to correct photos of a chupacabra and feel as though these are far more relevant to providing correct information. http://www.canadatop.com/uploads/chupacabra_2330.jpg http://elsuenoamericano.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/chupacabra-texas1.jpg http://www.cbsnews.com/i/tim//2010/01/19/119_cavazos_chupacabra_480x360.jpg http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/CBS_Production_News/791/256/chupacabra2_082108_480x360.jpg Chupcabra resembles a hairless type of canine with elongated snout and protruding teeth. the current image is ... stupidly misinformed.

184.146.158.107 (talk) 16:51, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Wikipedia can only use images compatible with CC-BY-SA Creative Commons license, so it looks like those would not be suitable replacement images. See Wikipedia:IMAGE#Finding images on the Internet for advice on finding appropriate images. The current #Appearance section gives a main description reasonably in line with the current drawing, and describes the hairless jackal appearance as an alternative description. I think that a compatibly-licensed and well-sourced rendition of this description would be an appropriate addition to this article. - 2/0 (cont.) 13:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Picture

I didn't leave an edit summary because the explanation seems a little long-winded, but here goes...

I took the picture down for several reasons, some of which are a little hard to articulate. But the picture is a user-drawn rendering of what some fantasy creature might look like. I don't think it quite meets the criteria for being encyclopedic, any more than my niece's crayon drawing of Barack Obama would be appropriate for his entry.

This is obviously a special case, because we're dealing with something for which no photograph can exist and there will never be any way to prove what the creature looks like. Just the same, I don't think that means we need to lower the standard for an illustration so low that we'll permit anything to post up whatever drawing they crap out. If that's the case, I can just say I think it's invisible. Or anyone else can draw something with entirely different features that they think are characteristic.

I think some kind of standard needs to apply, even if that standards is not particularly high. An image published elsewhere or widely associated with the legend would be appropriate, as would a picture of any chupacabra from any of the various TV shows or movies that have included them. But this Martian/stegosaurus/lizard hybrid doesn't seem to cut it, especially when the consensus seems to be that chupacabras are actually just coyotes with mange. This picture certainly doesn't suggest that.

I'm really not trying to get into any kind of edit war or anything, so if you feel strongly that this picture is the best we can get, and that it's better than nothing, I'm probably not going to revert. But I think we can probably do better.

— Bdb484 (talk) 20:59, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

No Bdb484 I don't want any problems. I just wanted to know why it was pulled down. I knew that if there was a good explanation my revert could easily be replaced. Did you know that the chupacabra page got 104,379 hits in June 2011? Thats the English version! Whatever changes we make affects a lot of viewers. Wondering out loud...if we could interview people who say they have seen the chupacabra and also this Wiki page would describe that picture you just took down, as opposed to people who haven't seen the Wiki page? Sgerbic (talk) 21:22, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I removed the picture again. As Bdb484 mentioned above it the picture doesn't represent the typical assumed features of a chupacabras. It misleads the readers. --Zinnmann (talk) 13:53, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I am sad the picture is gone. When my Guatemalan friend spoke to me about the chupacabras, the description was about a hopping bipedal creature. When I went to show the picture previously in Wikipedia, it was gone.216.250.178.63 (talk) 04:36, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

This article needs an illustration, pronto. --RThompson82 (talk) 08:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Latest Sighting

Just here recently There was a news story about the Chupacabra being found. It had video and eyewitness accounts. The article was from MSNBC and the Creature was dubbed Prince Chupa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.93.167.109 (talk) 23:46, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

These kind of stories show up fairly often, though none as of yet have been credible. Mosemamenti (talk) 02:52, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

That latest video of a captured chupacabra shown in news is this [2]. It's a mix, a dog, a rat, a kangaroo, and also possibly a hyena.Ksmdr (talk) 10:12, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

here is another one: [3]. JamesAlan1986 (talk-contribs) 11:31, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Yep that's the one. We should mention this in the article.Ksmdr (talk) 17:54, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

No. It's just a "Mexican Hairless Dog". Look it up. All these "sightings" ever been was just that dog, and people looking for publicity.

-G — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.153.38 (talk) 15:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

"regularization"

The article currently claims that chupacabra is a regularization of chupacabras. Is that really true? My Spanish is not great, but I would have thought that chupacabras was in fact the regular form (imperative transitive verb + plural noun). Presumably each chupacabras has to suck more than one goat, after all.

I think it's more likely that chupacabra is a back-formation based on the misapprehension that the final s in chupacabras pluralizes the whole noun, rather than just the goats. --Trovatore (talk) 04:42, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

This is not about Spanish. This is the English Wikipedia, and the overwhelmining current English usage is with chupacabra as the singular, and chupacabras as the plural. The title of the article is -a, NOT -as, and I am quite satisfied that this article should be changed to reflect that throughout. I tried to do that this afternoon: I patiently did the work and saved it, but someone called Dougweller reverted it, on the grounds that I had called it a minor edit when (he says) it was major, and that the respective numbers of millions of Google hits on the two forms (over 4.31 million for -a and 1.8 million for -as) were not evidence of usage. I am not going to get into an argument about it. As far as I am concerned, spelling the English the way the Spanish is allegedly spelled, with the singular and plural indistinguishable, is unacceptable.

• In Spanish, at least you have a way of distinguishing numbers by the definite article (el /los); but in English with "the" you don't.
• The article's title is -a
• The overwhelming English news item spelling is -a for singular. See for example Are these the legendary Chupacabras... or just mangy coyotes? where a sentence using the singular reads "Thus, the legend of the chupacabra was born." and another "′Anybody that calls in a chupacabra — it′s a coyote with mange′ Jack Bonner, Williamson County's trapper, said" .

There is no reason to keep using the un-English, disfavoured (by English language users) Spanish spelling for this thing that has millions of usages in English just on the web, even if somebody at Wikipedia central has made a rule that Google searches are not evidence for some reason. There. Have I said enough to convince you? I am too busy with other website work to waste any more time. Iph (talk) 16:33, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

No need to convince me, we just don't use Google as a source. I've changed the lead. Dougweller (talk) 17:05, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request, regarding Mr. O'Connor's theory

Disclaimer: I don't believe the Chupacabra to be anything more than an urban legend, having lived in Puerto Rico during its heyday. My request simply addresses a very obvious flaw in Mr. O'Connor's theory.

Actual request: While Mr. O'Connor's opinion is useful in explaining some cases of alleged sightings in the US, it does not offer any insight into the origins of the myth, since there are no wild coyotes in Puerto Rico. However, this section of the article states "Barry O'Connor concluded that all of the 'chupacabras' were simply coyotes infected with the parasite Sarcoptes scabiei".

Sources: <url>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote</url>

I've fixed that section to clarify that it applies only to some cases.--Ljvillanueva (talk) 19:45, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

This might be a picture of the Chupacabra found in Free State - South Africa

It was found in the Freestate, South Africa attaching sheep on a farm.

I am not sure how to upload the picture though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melanie.schutte1 (talk • contribs) 12:30, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

1995

The article gives the impression that the concept of Chupacabra was virtually unknown before 1995. Is that so?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.127.182.53 (talk) 16:05, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

That is correct; although there were "mythical" creatures vaguely resembling a chupacabras (such as the "duendecillos verdes del Yunque" [little green men from El Yunque ]), their function was more like that of boogeymen who'd kidnap children who wandered too far from their parents while at the National Park. Sings-With-Spirits (talk) 14:14, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

As Hamlet said, "That would be scanned." If Chupacabras is first reported in Puerto Rico in 1995, how did the "X Files" decide that it was noteworthy enough and have time to develop an episode that aired on national TV in 1997? It clearly was widely established by then and 2 years seems like an awfully short time to have the myth grow, especially since it needed to cross over from Hispanic to mainstream American culture.63.124.22.40 (talk) 19:41, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Futurama reference

The bone vampires in Fry Am the Egg Man may have been inspired by the chupacabras. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.210.50.25 (talk) 11:35, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

New dog species?

I have recently looked at an alledged photo of the Chupacabra. The creature was large and hairless, with a small head, long legs and hairless grey-skinned body, perfect for cooling off and maintaining homeostasis in its Mexican desert habitat. I have never such anatomy in any canine or wild dog, not even in cyotes. This beast might actually be a new species of hairless wild dog adapted for attacking livestock.--Superscaryguy (talk) 11:56, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm starting to believe that we may need to branch this into two pages, one featuring the original Puerto Rican version (i.e. bipedal, muscular, agile, red eyed and spiky) and the other featuring the Mexican-Texan version, which is usually a dog. The fact that the ugly dogs are becoming more well known than the original version is misinforming. The fact that it is called the "Mexican Bigfoot" is just plain wrong. 166.147.120.144 (talk) 10:30, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

This article needs an illustration...

And we need to build a consensus to choose one. Now, in 2011 a research was published that suggested that the original depiction was based on the film Species and traced it to a single eyewitness, Madeline Tolentino. I'm not interested in debating the theory, but Madeline is also credited as the first witness in at least 3 books that cover the topic and the drawing based on her account by a police officer (and singed by her as well) is the one that was first published in El Vocero. I am not saying that it needs to be in the infobox necessarily, but Madeline Tolentino's Chupacabras needs to be illustrated somewhere in the article, since all of the eyewitness descriptions during the first 5-7 years (before Mexicans began depicting it as coyotes and hairless dogs in the early to mid 2000s) were based on this original drawing. I only found a smallish picture of it in this page, but larger more detailed ones are bound to be out there. 166.147.120.157 (talk) 07:00, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Since the page is somewhat over-illustrated, I'm referring to this photo. Notice Madeline's writting the description of the Chupacabras all over the place and her signature above the officer's. 166.147.120.157 (talk) 07:12, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Not done for now: Please propose an image hosted on Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. Rivertorch (talk) 18:07, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

There was one that wasn't 100% loyal to Tolentino's but it was somewhat simmilar. However, as you can read above, someone incredibly ignorant to the myth's origins suggested that it was removed and replaced with one of a mange infected dog or coyote. The image is still on Commons. 166.147.120.148 (talk) 02:16, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

If you provide a link, other editors can take a look at it and decide. Rivertorch (talk) 05:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

How about these - commons:Category:Chupacabra. 124.123.195.151 (talk) 04:10, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Chupacabra is not correct

The original and coherent form in Spanish is chupacabras. The singular form is a confusion by the native English speakers when they compare the term with goat sucker, and doesn't make sense in Spanish at all since the creature doesn't suck one goat, but many.

62.57.222.140 (talk) 12:33, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

This is discussed above. The spelling in the article is the normal English spelling. It really doesn't matter if it's a confused version of the Spanish spelling, this is the English wikipedia so we use the normal English spelling. Dougweller (talk) 13:09, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Then, is it chupacabra or Chupacabra? Whatever, make it consistent throughout the article.145.53.180.22 (talk) 21:46, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Other Theories can be added

source:http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptotourism/chupacabras/ Request to add another topic heading involving "Other Theories" on the Chupacabra provided by credible cryptozoologists such as Nick Redfern, from the link above. I am also requesting additions to the "Sightings", "Solving the Mystery" and "Significant Appearances in Media" headings. After having read a couple journal articles on Chupacabra Iconography I would like to add a list of toy conceptions of the Chupacabra and how it became such a prevalent pop culture phenomena. I have been researching el Chupa for about a month and a half now for a library class I am in regarding famous cryptids. source: Radford, B.(2012). Tracking the Chupacacameleon: Chupacabra Iconograpgy. Skeptical Inquirer, 36, 26-27 FrasierE (talk) 22:07, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.. Please see our policy on what sources are reliable and then come back if you can find some.

caticoo

[7ft or bigger] The Caticoo is a large cat that stands on its hind legs, and from being a monster when close by if another young animal or child is indanger will protect and throw itself infront and defend the creature that is in trouble.The Caticoo is a guardian of young animals and children only.Elexia Gonzales — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.6.186.49 (talk) 04:49, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Referenced in Phineas and Ferb

A recent episode of Phineas and Ferb, 'La Candace-Cabra', featured the characters pursuing the Chupacabra while singing a song called 'Chupacabra Ho' - see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfX-cCs6dnU and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYyqUI4JN6I 94.193.214.181 (talk) 16:54, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Chupacabra investigated on Only In America:Larry The Cable Guy Episode 7/31/2013

Phylis Canion gave a complete different story on this show than is listed in this article. Since the article is locked I can't change all of the new stuff she claims. She shows she has a stuffed Chupacabra during the episode. She never mentions the Texas State University DNA test saying it was a coyote, and that the only part she saved was the head. Her claim is that they did DNA testing and there was no match. Her story is suspect (as all of them are on this particular animal). 64.46.249.163 (talk) 14:49, 2 August 2013 (UTC)Ryan

Correction

In the recent sightings section where Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files is mentioned, it is said that they used a Miniature Horse and a Mexican Hairless Dog.

I would like to point out two mistakes. First, the proper name for the Mexican Hairless is Xoloitzcuintli (the spelling commonly used in the USA) or Xoloitzcuintle (the spelling used in Mexico, the Xolo's home country).

The second, and more important mistake is that Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files did NOT use a Xoloitzcuintle. They used a Peruvian Inca Orchid. The PIO is another hairless breed that comes from South America that has many significant differences from the Xolo. As a Xolo owner, it pains me to see my breed being mistaken for another. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iorveth (talk • contribs) 10:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Lost World Museum

Should this be here at all? See [4] for background on Adolfi, and [5] for the museum. Dougweller (talk) 16:24, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 20 September 2013

On September 17, 2013 at 11:29 am Fox 2 News affiliate in Saint Louis, Missouri Posted on on their website that a woman spotted a Chupacabra while "coon hunting." The Valley Park resident caught the animal on photo and video.

W. Edwin Scott (talk) 13:25, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Done Thanks for contributing this. (The source actually reports two separate sightings. I have described both in the article.) --Stfg (talk) 13:23, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

1995 date

The chupacabra may have come to be popular in the 1995 after it appeared in Puerto Rico. But I am from the Dominican Republic. I migrated to USA in 1992 and years before that I (Rick) was hearing stories about Chupacabra; probably at the end of the 80s. I remember being afraid to go outside because of it. And as a matter of fact some live stocks my mother had were killed and it was said Chupacabra killed them. By Rick. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichiePS (talk • contribs) 09:24, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

The Chupacabra was detailed in the 1993 book, "Unexplained!: 347 Strange Sightings, Incredible Occurrences, and Puzzling Physical Phenomena" by Jerome Clark. http://www.amazon.com/Unexplained-Sightings-Incredible-Occurrences-Phenomena/dp/0810394367 24.251.235.49 (talk) 18:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Is it possible you are referring to the Second Edition of the book?

• Clark, Jerome (November 1, 1998). Unexplained!: Strange Sightings, Incredible Occurrences & Puzzling Physical Phenomena (2nd ed.). Visible Ink Press. ISBN 978-1578590704.

Nmillerche (talk) 22:35, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

No. I purchased it in 1994. 24.251.235.49 (talk) 07:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Vampire

This is a hematophagic cryptid, why is it in Category:Vampires? It is not a 'transformed' human corpse, does not sleep in its grave overnight, etc etc. Lots of hallmarks of the vampire are missing. A mosquito isn't a vampire either, it's a real blood-sucking animal. If a mosquito is not a vampire, then a blood-sucking cryptid animal shouldn't be a vampire either. One does not simply become a vampire by being a cryptid. I request removal from Category:Vampires. -- Ciaraleone (talk) 12:03, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

As a registered user, you don't have to request re-categorization. You can simply find a more relevant category and replace "vampires" with that one. Dimadick (talk) 09:34, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

I agree that many of the hallmarks of Slavic vampires are missing, but there are many different vampiric archetypes. Dracula is not said to have subsisted on the blood of livestock, but this is common in some vampire literature. Furthermore the chupacabra, while a relatively young legend, has its own elements of vampiric folklore. Nmillerche (talk) 15:28, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Vampires per definitionem correspond to the traits ascribed to them in slavic folklore. There has been a gruesome inflation of the term "vampire" to denote any hematophagic fictional entity. As per Dimadick's suggestion, I have created the more suitable category of Category:Mythological hematophages, which is more accurate from both a linguistic and anthropological perspective. The issue why I'm requesting recategorization is that this article is locked. -- Ciaraleone (talk) 02:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

It is not locked, only semi-protected. Autoconfirmed users can still use it. Dimadick (talk) 09:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

General Hospital

They've been reading from this article on the soap opera General Hospital over the last couple of days. RNealK (talk) 23:53, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2014

Correct link to note #30: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/12/28/man-shoots-kills-chupacabra-kentucky/ 88.113.164.170 (talk) 09:35, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Done See [6] Thanks, NiciVampireHeart 12:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Request to edit

I am not sure if this is where you make the request, but I'll do it here anyways. There are somehow the spelling mistake, misspelling chupacabra, in which they spell it Chubakabras. Also, I have found other things to put under pop culture. I would be grateful if you let me slightly edit some things. Thank you.

Format

Per Tracking the Chupacabra, I think that we should create separate sections for the "original spiny lizard" version and the "coyote/dog hybrid" version. Having a single and generic "sightings" section is problematic, given that the two versions vary drastically. Also, listing so many recent "sightings" of the "dog" variant and virtually none of the "spiky lizard" is undue, since the original reptilian had hundreds of supposed sightings. BTW, I think that a photo with Tolentino's original depiction and Sil from Species side-by-side could be helpful to illustrate Radford's theory. El Alternativo (talk) 12:48, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2014

24.96.76.139 (talk) 18:09, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Lol i love spongebob , hes the best !

•  Declined. Not an edit request. Lugia2453 (talk) 18:11, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Dewitt, TX, USA

Should the alleged capture on 3 April 2014 in Dewitt, TX go into the sightings area? Some people believe it is a chupacabra, but others feel it will be proven to be another form of canine. 67.86.177.110 (talk) 23:27, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

The local game warden determined this animal was a racoon, and it's been put down. This is reported on Yahoo News. There is video of it. Someone with edit permission should update not just this story, but also say that hairless racoons are also a culprit. Also, is there some reason mange is spreading more since 1995? 86.129.175.167 (talk) 09:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Regularizing spelling

The naming conventions section explains that chupacabras is the original spelling, but that chupacabra is the regularized spelling. I have therefore regularized the spelling to the best of my ability.--~TPW 22:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk archiving

Is there any objection to setting up automatic archiving for this talk page?--~TPW 22:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm just a drive-by editor, but be bold. Worst thing that can happen is somebody not liking it and reverting it. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 22:20, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 May 2014

I believe that another Chupacabra was reported in Vernon Valley, NJ by a young couple who just moved into their first home. Jessedh (talk) 14:14, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Not done: as your "belief" is not enough.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, albeit that, in the context of this article "reliable" can only mean reported. - Arjayay (talk) 14:22, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Correct Origin of the Myth is Missing

I first heard of el Chupacabra around 1980 in northern Arizona, where the stories were told as monster tales among school boys. The alleged sightings in 1995 borrow the name from a much older myth. This page completely misses that, in favor of the hype caused the the alleged sightings after 1995. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:420:405:1350:8D9C:363D:1B5A:2698 (talk) 19:40, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Improper history

• The legend dates back to at least the 1950s and merely reached wide notoriety in the mid-90s.[See, for example.][7]
• Folklorist/anthropology sources badly needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.45.202.34 (talk) 07:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2014

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Looks like you just want to add "Seen in the video game Diablo III under the name of "Chupa Khazra"". Find a reliable source that says this exists and I will be happy to enter it Cannolis (talk) 02:53, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

In popular culture

The popularity of the chupacabra has resulted in its being featured in several types of media.

• At least one published mystery novel uses aspects of the myth as the centerpoint of the plot. Other kinds of books include those that provide a scientific explanation for the phenomena.

• The Chupacabra appears in Chupacabra: Dark Seas, starring John Rhys-Davies

• The Chupacabra appears in Guns of El Chupacabra, starring Scott Shaw.

• CNN's Ed Lavandera has described the chupacabra as the "Bigfoot of Latino culture" and has stated that "El Chupacabra also symbolizes the fear of something that doesn't exist". Following the incident in Cuero, Texas, the popularity of the chupacabra myth was receiving global attention. Phylis Canion, who was responsible for capturing the alleged specimen, claimed that T-shirts highlighting the event were shipped to locations such as Italy, Guam, and Iraq. The publicity that Cuero received following this event has led to some suggesting changing the town's mascot. In July 2008, History's Monster Quest series featured the Texas carcasses, which were determined to be dogs and coyotes.

• Welsh rock band Super Furry Animals has a song on the 1997 album Radiator called "Chupacabras".

• In a special issue of Marvel Comics' Fantastic Four released 28 December 2007, a group of chupacabras are featured as antagonists.

• In Season 2, episode 45 of Dexter's Laboratory, Dexter, boy genius, creates 'La Chupacabra' by mistake, a creature who devours everything, and makes its way to South America. Dexter and DeeDee go there to find and stop it.

• The Chupacabra appears in Scooby-Doo and the Monster of Mexico with its vocal effects provided by Frank Welker. This version is depicted as a Mexican Bigfoot.

• The Chupacabras appear in Ugly Americans.

• In Season 4, episode 11, "El Mundo Gira" of The X-Files, the mythology is the background for the story, but the episode's strange deaths are shown to have a different cause.

• Seen in the video game Diablo III under the name of "Chupa Khazra".

John.k.ireland (talk) 21:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2014

half of the sources for this article are 404's. can't be found. = hoaxes. also, it's a fucking hoax. it doesn't exists. take some fucking responsability. 176.10.248.195 (talk) 18:52, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

You don't seem to know what an encyclopedia is, do you? Having an article on something doesn't mean saying it's true. Otherwise we wouldn't have articles on Greek gods or Star Trek episodes. Still, have a good time learning about stuff. Happy Christmas! Sophie means wisdom (talk) 19:28, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Not done: - You haven't requested anything ..... Quick note - Any dead cites can be added via archive sites anyway, Please only use the edit request to actually request edits to said article, Thanks, –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 19:59, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2015

Sightings; 01/28/2015 by Johnny Depp. Quoted from an entry on the Associated Press upon his arrival in Japan to promote his latest film "Mortdecai" in Tokyo. Johnny Depp has recovered from a cold,.and a chupacabra attack. The 51-year-old actor was all smiles while joking Wednesday with journalists in Tokyo about why he was a no-show at a news conference a day earlier. Depp explained he had been ill but said that wasn't the reason. "I was attacked yesterday morning by a very rarely seen or experienced animal called 'chupacabra.' I fought with it for hours. They're very persistent, very mean. And I'm pretty sure it came into my suitcase. I threw him off the 23rd floor. So we'll never see him again. Thank you for understanding," he said. Depp's tale drew laughs from the crowd of reporters. Bwkenworthy (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  18:36, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request 7 February 2015

Should add in Popular Culture section:

The episode 5 of season 2 of the TV series The Walking Dead is titled Chupacabra (The Walking Dead). The parallel is made through the character of Daryl, which hunts and eats raw flesh from game meat. He also scares his companions on his way back to the barn. This reference to the chupacabra legend in a zombie universe emphasizes the need for bloodsucking of both fictional creatures. Savoiretpouvoir (talk) 01:24, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 16:56, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

It needs some help, first off there's some bad grammar. I'm not the best at fixing it so some one else should do the job :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grubbyman3 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Chupacabra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150316162707/http://www.eltiempo.com/nacion/boyaca/ARTICULO-WEB-NOTA_INTERIOR-3539469.html to http://www.eltiempo.com/nacion/boyaca/ARTICULO-WEB-NOTA_INTERIOR-3539469.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150402143446/http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070831/ap_on_re_us/mythical_chupacabra_1;_ylt=AnDelIZ4v5tFOrVuRPy0I_EE1vAI to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070831/ap_on_re_us/mythical_chupacabra_1;_ylt=AnDelIZ4v5tFOrVuRPy0I_EE1vAI
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150413123552/http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?referralObject=3018890 to http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?referralObject=3018890
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110911082733/http://www.click2houston.com:80/news/28514536/detail.html to http://www.click2houston.com/news/28514536/detail.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:12, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Edit Request: In Popular Culture addition

The popular "Red Dead Redemption" video game "Undead Nightmare" DLC expansion pack refers to El Chupacabra as a primary plot element key to completion of the overall objective for the game. References and lore are explored through much of the dialogue and plot naratives within the game. SquashEngineer (talk) 17:13, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

References:

• In-game achievement description from True Achievements http://www.trueachievements.com/a77855/chupathingy-achievement.htm
• YouTube gameplay overview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtheYUAc0hI
• Wikipedia Video Game page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Dead_Redemption:_Undead_Nightmare

SquashEngineer (talk) 17:43, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Cryptozoology, Pseudoscience, and WP:UNDUE

A user has been reverting the removal of "cryptid" from the introduction. Wikipedia doesn't promote fringe theories and it doesn't get a whole lot more fringe in these matters than cryptozoology, which is a pseudoscience. Cryptid is a term used solely by cryptozoologists and describing this being, an example of modern folklore (contemporary legend), as a "cryptid" directly violates WP:UNDUE and WP:FRINGE. :bloodofox: (talk) 04:18, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I have a suggestion: What about inserting J.Talavera's historic sighting of the chupacabra in Nicaragua? He shot the chupacabra and removed the skeleton. what do you think? Gigantopithecusman (talk) 13:10, 9 March 2016 (UTC)