This article has been or is the subject of broader naming disputes. Rather than starting a separate discussion here, please use the centralized page Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) to discuss the issues involved.
This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the NorthGermanic peoples, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptozoology, an attempt to improve coverage of the pseudoscience and subculture of cryptozoology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.CryptozoologyWikipedia:WikiProject CryptozoologyTemplate:WikiProject CryptozoologyCryptids
I said in an edit summary that the trivia section was getting out of hand and removed the random collection of references found there. They are back, with the edit summary Says you; most pop culture pages list and all their examples until they warrant their own article. Please read WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. A bullet point list of random references can never warrant a wikipedia article. Also, the section as it now stands does not comply with basic style guidelines which mandate that we write our articles as coherent text. Stefán17:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is that so? What would you say to this page, that came as a product of this very same argument over another figure from myth? Furthermore, of course this isn't indiscriminate; just because you were never aware of all these references doesn't mean they're suddenly "random". By half-assing the section with some sentance that says, 'there's stuff in animé and comics, 'n junk', you're cheating others out of knowing just how the name is used, and purhaps, why. Virtually all the pop culture sections in wiki do this so nobody is left in the dark - something an encyclopedia should never do. -Biokinetica19:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Although I think I can live with that page, I'm not sure if there are enough references to warrant a seperate one (refer to Lilith's pop culture page). But a lot of them are missing, so i'll find and add those. -Biokinetica05:43, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The reason these pages are created in the first place is because these references are constantly added to such articles. They constantly multiply. This seems to be the best way to deal with such references. :bloodofox:05:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
