Talk:Bogeyman

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Horror Top‑importance

	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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mythology Mid‑importance

	Mythology portal 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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Culture High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 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.CultureWikipedia:WikiProject CultureTemplate:WikiProject Cultureculture articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion Top‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. 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.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 June 2019 and 16 August 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gracepchicken. Peer reviewers: CylentRain.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

/archive 1

Unsourced Information[edit]

This article is poorly sourced. Many of its sections don't have any citations and looks more like original research. These sections need to be given proper citations in order to count them as credible and notable pieces of information as required on Wikipiedia.--Paleface Jack (talk) 21:38, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The section detailing the different versions of the Bogeyman from different countries is largely unsourced and needs to have all unsourced information either removed or given proper citations if they exist. Considering the article's high importance to both mythology and horror, I'ms surprised that members of those WikiProjects haven't been working on this. Hopefully this article gets the attention it deserves since it can easily be qualified for GA and FA status if enough work is done to it.--Paleface Jack (talk) 20:17, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bogeyman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927102743/http://www.on-the-edge.com/articles/raja_ampat.php to http://www.on-the-edge.com/articles/raja_ampat.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:21, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Notice: Please Read[edit]

Hello everyone, just wanted to say this before anyone goes around adding additional information to this article, all information MUST have proper citations from reliable sources BEFORE they are added to the article. Although it's appreciated that people are willing to expand this article by adding new information but for now more attention should be focused on adding proper citations to unsourced information and removing any information where no source can be found for it. Hopefully we can get this article cleaned up and expanded enough so that it meets Wikipiedia's guidelines and standards of a well developed and properly sourced article, and hopefully GA or FA status.--Paleface Jack (talk) 19:57, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't imagine there has been a lot of academic research done on these topics; and I'd hate to see these people's contributions deleted because of that.Serendi ^pod ous 12:39, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

This article was categorised as category:Folklore of the United States by state. All the other members of that category are about individual States so I changed the category to category:American folklore legendary creatures. I then added category:English legendary creatures but the article mentions lots of different countries. I suggest removing the country categories from this article, but didn't want to be too bold. Any objections? --Northernhenge (talk) 12:08, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It should be in a world mythology category or something similar Jenny Everywhere (talk) 17:19, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since every world culture has a bogeyman or similar being Jenny Everywhere (talk) 17:20, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite[edit]

This article is undersourced and poorly developed, needing significant attention in order to bring it to its best capacity. That being said, there needs to be more information on the actual origins, traits, and the like rather then putting more attention on the various incarnations in different cultures. When I mean "traits" I'm talking about things that each variation in the world shares (properly sourced from a reliable academic). There's just way too much information that has been left out of this article that it's kind of sad, considering how significant the subject is. Hopefully someone comes along and gives this article the attention it needs to fulfill its full potential.--Paleface Jack (talk) 18:11, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That will not be easy. Academic material on this subject is very obscure and unlikely to be found on a simple google search. Much of it will likely not be available in English. It would require a recruitment drive of motivated, knowledgeable people to truly tackle it. Serendi ^podous 18:49, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We can always use alternate, but equally reliable sources as well.--Paleface Jack (talk) 20:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology[edit]

How the hell is the Bulgarian торбалан similar to the rest of the Indo-European words? When searching for that word on Google, try as I might, I hear no similarity in either of the first few hits. I think it sounds a lot more like /'tʊrba'lan/ and nothing like the other, actually Indo-European /bo-/, /bʊ-/ and /bu-/ words. Am I right or am I right? — Nameless Undead (talk) 14:20, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

With no explanation introduced in Latin script by an anonymous user in revision 476007389, later corrected to Cyrillic by another anonymous user in 697503900. — Nameless Undead (talk) 11:49, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, right after the Greek μπαμπούλας (mpampoúlas — also seemed out of place for me here, until I found out that it is pronounced as /baˈbulas/) there are Georgian letters "ბუა" (Google thinks they translate to "boo"), which don't appear to make a part of any coherent grammatical structure in the larger sentence. — Nameless Undead (talk) 14:20, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Borked by Xenozoid in revision 865388514 with no explanation. — Nameless Undead (talk) 11:49, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why capitalize "bogeyman"? Can we agree on lower case?[edit]

I believe "bogeyman" should not be capitalized. It's not named after a place, the dictionary doesn't capitalize it, we wouldn't capitalize "the monster", and therefore we shouldn't capitalize "the bogeyman". I would change it, but I have had the experience of other users reverting my edits, so I prefer to bring this up here to make sure there is some consensus before making the change. Thoughts? DBlomgren (talk) 13:11, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My contribution was deleted[edit]

Myanmar - Children are threatened with Pashu Gaung Phyat, meaning Malayu Headhunter. In Burmese we used to call Malays with the name Pashu which may come from Bajau or Bugis. Even Peninsular Malaysia was called Pashu Peninsular. It is a common knowledge that some ethnic groups in Eastern Malaysia, Iban and Dayak were notorious headhunters. Although the Wa tribe of Burma was famous previously until the 1970s, ferocious headhunters,[7] it is a misery why Burmese use that faraway Pashus as bogeyman. @ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=310881124&title=Bogeyman --Darz kkg (talk) 09:47, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bogey[edit]

Does the term bogey from Multiservice tactical brevity code originate here? Also, that first pronunciation, does it have a geographical location?Halbared (talk) 07:38, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

N[edit]

Bogeyman 75.110.101.160 (talk) 03:45, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Boogy man[edit]

English 2.29.44.33 (talk) 16:41, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Boogie woogie[edit]

Medium 2600:6C50:78F0:80D0:8DEB:2EA9:4E7A:D5E2 (talk) 01:57, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Citation 27 - Egyptian Boogeyman Analogue[edit]

This Egyptian boogeyman analogue, the "Abu Rigl Maslukha" is cited under what is currently citation 27. This citation comes from a WordPress blog, which itself is a folklore and fiction blog and does not reference any further sources in the blog post where the referenced creature appears. When I Google "Abu Rigl Maslukha" as well I can't find any sources that link back to anything other than this WordPress blog. I am not sure if stories of this creature actually exist, and if they do then someone might consider finding a better source to cite for its existence. 47.222.163.183 (talk) 09:11, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]