Talk:Fearsome critters

Folklore 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Merge[edit]

Should this be merged with the Cryptid section? --Jehan60188 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, at best this a subsection of North American cryptids Peter (talk) 12:13, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, fearsome critters are not cryptids, no more than a unicorn or dragon may be termed as such. Fearsome critters were developed as ruses for newcomers to the logging camps. They are a parody of natural history and were rarely ever intended more than a practical joke. While there have been practical jokers involved in cryptids, this is seen as a perversion of crytozoology. Whereas with fearsome critters, this is seen as the point. If you are going to count fearsome critters as cryptids, you might as well count the Easter Bunny and Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer too. User:Tripodero (talk) 5:48 AM, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Church, Jill M. (2016). "Fearsome critters". In Fee, Christopher R.; Webb, Jeffrey B. (eds.). American Myths, Legends, and Tall Tales: An encyclopedia of American folklore, Volume 1. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO. pp. 365–7. ISBN 978-1-6106-9567-1.

Leaving this source here in case editors of this page find it useful. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 16:35, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@IsaacTheChristianCryptozoologist, please discuss your changes here. The list is for links to critters with their own articles, like a directory to the most prominent examples. If you'd like Tree-Squeak (or other critters) mentioned, you should either make sure that it meets our notability requirements and create a draft of a new article, or make a case for expanding the list. Wikipedia works on a consensus model. Because your edits have been disputed, the onus is on you to convince other editors that they belong. Woodroar (talk) 21:37, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@IsaacTheChristianCryptozoologist, what's your question? Woodroar (talk) 22:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that every entry in the article has its own Wikipedia article. Tree Squeak does not. If you want it in this list, then WP:Write the article first. To start a draft and submit it for review, see Wikipedia:Articles for creation. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:15, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]