Talk:Bigfoot

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bigfoot article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13: 3 months

Template:Vital article

Bigfoot is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 22, 2006	Featured article candidate	Not promoted

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Folklore Start‑class Low‑importance

	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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Cryptozoology B‑class Top‑importance

	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
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Paranormal B‑class Mid‑importance

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Canada: Ontario / Manitoba / British Columbia / Saskatchewan / Alberta B‑class Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
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.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Manitoba.
	This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Saskatchewan.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Alberta.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States: Washington B‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
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.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Low-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Oregon B‑class Low‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon 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.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon
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.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Cascadia

This article is part of WikiProject Cascadia, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Cascadia. 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.CascadiaWikipedia:WikiProject CascadiaTemplate:WikiProject CascadiaCascadia

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Pennsylvania B‑class Low‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania 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.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania
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.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Skepticism B‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles 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.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
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.

It is requested that a video clip or video clips be included in this article to improve its quality.

Charles Hill-Tout source

The reference of Squatchin' or Benign Faced can be found here among other places https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Folk-Lore/Volume_10/Sqaktktquaclt,_or_the_Benign-Faced,_the_Oannes_of_the_Ntlaka-pamuq Charles Hill-Tout work is in the public domain now. It would be good to use the name "Sqaktktquaclt". The article seems to want the idea to come from much broader original sources than a misunderstanding or great elaboration of the folklorists who studied the stories of the people of the Pacific Northwest.--73.66.142.147 (talk) 03:22, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Plural

Either Bigfeet, Bigfoots, or Squatchins' is acceptable according to Merriam Webster ^[1]

References

^ Merriam Webster

Bigfoot

LL: Your paragraph regarding bear tracks - even castings - being mistaken for sasquatch tracks HAS NO REFERENCE in fact. YOU assert the information and then reference a source of what bear tracks look like - NOT who, when or where any authoritative person has mistaken a track - and more especially A CASTING (which you claim) - for a BLACK bear track. Dr. Jeff Meldrum has a collection of HUNDREDS of sasquatch track castings - NOT ONE is that of a bear. You fail to recognize that BLACK BEAR TRACKS (there ARE NO GRIZZLIES in most of the areas castings and tracks are made/found, and NONE in the Pacific Northwest for over 100 years) AREN'T LARGE AT ALL! The hind foot of a black bear IS NO MORE THAN 8"!! So ANY well defined track larger than 9 inches AIN'T A BLACK BEAR TRACK. Regardless - your assertion and reference are MISPLACED and out of order. Cowboycorvette (talk) 19:45, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The existing article content doesn't belong to me, so I'm not sure what you mean by "my" paragraph. Anyway, on Wikipedia, we follow WP:FRINGE, which directs us to give primary weight to mainstream scientific views, and less (if any) weight to fringe views. Proponents of Bigfoot's existence like Meldrum, fall under our fringe guideline, so when describing the subject, we use WP:FRIND sources (i.e. sources that are independent of the view that Bigfoot exists). The paragraph I believe you may be talking about is cited to a high quality WP:FRIND source, Joe Nickell. Hope this clarifies things for you. Regards, LuckyLouie (talk) 20:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My "editorializing" discusses the issues David Thompson mentioned in 1811, WHICH ARE STILL ASSERTED BY ANTHROPOLOGISTS TODAY: 1) That Sasquatches are merely folklore 2) That they are based in "the fondness of mankind for the marvellous" and not FACT BASIS - while THEY IGNORE THE FACTUAL EVIDENCE of the species' existence, AND DON'T STUDY IT. You discuss all the BS proffered by the EXTREMELY UNSCIENTIFIC Melba Ketchum et al. We all understand that there are wackos - even educated wackos - who "latch on to the sasquatch phenomenon. You want to discuss this - but NOT discuss CREDIBLE FACTUAL INFORMATION while adding YOUR assertions with no references?? Not happenin boss. PS - I am a Doctoral scientist and STRICTLY ADHERE to The Scientific Method. I don't sit all day at a computer and pretend I own articles and make my own assumptions regarding bear tracks - which you've probably never even seen before. So let's stop the pissing contest here boss. Your bear tracks paragraph IS OUT OF ORDER and YOUR OWN assertion. Even of referenced to an anthropologist claiming bear tracks are mistaken as sasquatch tracks - especially castings - REFERENCE BY WHOM, WHEN AND WHERE - which you can't do. Otherwise - IT STAYS OUT. If you want to discuss tracks - DISCUSS FACTUAL INFORMATION Cowboycorvette (talk) 20:05, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"while THEY IGNORE THE FACTUAL EVIDENCE" Who are they? Are you talking about someone specifically? Dimadick (talk) 20:49, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019

Per WP:FRINGE, I've removed number of paragraphs in the "Recognition" section that promote Melba Ketchum's registration of a name for Bigfoot with Zoobank.org as WP:UNDUE weight and non-WP:FRIND sourcing. I've summarized the coverage of her registration using an independent source, and relocated it to the appropriate section discussing Ketchum's various claims and activities. In addition, I've removed statements by Jane Goodall that duplicate those already contained in the Popular culture section. Finally, I've removed lengthy hyperbolic claims about Bigfoot cited to a non-notable paperback book by cryptozoologist Dmitri Bayanov. - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Name of an immature Bigfoot?

I propose we call them Largetoe.

[1] Merriam Webster

[1]