Talk:List of lake monsters

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

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Lack of verifiability

I can't find any sources for some of the lakes with "reported lake monsters" in this list. For example, Lake James in North Carolina: a brief search on the Internet for such phrases as "Lake James monster" yields references only to large fish. The Wikipedia article for Lake James does not mention anything remotely close to a monster report. We need some kind of references to support entries here, if not already provided in the linked-to article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daivox (talk • contribs) 17:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, this a common problem with folklore/legends articles. People can sneak in listings and if nobody is watching, it can look like its real. This list though looks like its mostly from an appendix from the book Mysterious America by Loren Coleman (google books seems to have it). However, I don't know how much research was put into making the list in the book. I would hope before adding in a listing, one would at least try to find another source, even if it an article from a newspaper that makes little effort to verify findings. Most of these could be deleted without any real harm. Naturally, the famous lake monsters (Loch Ness) should stay. Mateinsixtynine (talk) 05:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sections

Why are there so many empty sections in this article? It just makes it harder to navigate and leads to a TOC that inflates the number of claims. Locke9k (talk) 21:55, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dead links

If a link to a wikipedia page is dead and has no reference, then it is totally unverified and has no business being here. If you have a reference or a page then they could be readded. Until then, I'm removing them. Locke9k (talk) 21:58, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also many of these are just links to a location and not to a 'lake monster', with no explanation as to why they are here. I'm removing those as well. Locke9k (talk) 21:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

I have deleted a bunch of apparent empty materia in this article. This falls into several categories. One is nations or states with no associated monsters (this is not a list of geographical regions) Another is lakes with no apparent monster affiliated (this is not a list of lakes). Another is lakes that have a monster listed but for which there is no citation and article for either the lake or the monster. Another is lakes that have a monster listed and no article for the monster and no mention of a monster in the lake article. I have removed some of the ones where there is no citation and there are articles for both, but where there is no mention in either article that this lake monster has been reported in this lake (there are probably more of these left to remove). I will note that this article has had a citation request up for over 6 months. If you want to readd any of these please include sufficient in-line citations to establish fact and notability.Locke9k (talk) 23:06, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Responding to your concerns, the article is far from complete. The lakes with "no monsters" are the ones that either don't have a specific name, or the name is just "[name of lake] Monster". I know we need more refs, so we could back up some of these with other references, such as from the Internet or other books. I've omitted all river monsters from this list. The appendix of the book citation I've used is compiled from other listings. It is only natural for some of these lakes' articles not to have a mention of the monster, because many of these incidents are not very well known to the general public. There are literally thousands of items that could go into this article (and thousands of different citations are difficult, or take a long time, to come up with!). I don't have access to the book at the moment, but I suggest removing only those items which neither the book, nor any seaches on the Internet, can back up. Some of these lakes don't even have an article, because they may be small lakes in which Wikipedia has an article on a lake with the same name, but not on the given lake in particular. If this article gets too long, we could split some entries into new articles. I'm hoping to work on this article in the next few months. Please keep the empty categories, but hide them using  for now. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 16:03, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to add more if they are well cited. Let me just note, though, that if the "incideent" in not 'well enough known to the public' to be reported on in mainstream news sources, then it is not notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia. In that case, its inclusion in this list is probably questionable at best. The list should probably be kept to notable reports of lake monsters; those that made the news or some other mainstream source at some point. Locke9k (talk) 18:47, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Order

Is there any order in this list? Alphabetical or something? --Againme (talk) 16:31, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Countries

I'm unclear as to what the two geographic columns mean. Why are the English lakes in the UK, but the Scottish lakes aren't? Tim (Xevious) (talk) 11:01, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of reported lake monsters. 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/20080924051503/http://laketarponmonster.com/ to http://www.laketarponmonster.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:48, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of reported lake monsters. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:34, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Trout Lake Monster

Needs to be added. 2001:56A:F03F:5200:F9EB:3C2A:1EDA:9E0E (talk) 22:58, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eachy

I removed Eachy from the list. It appears to have stemmed from a long-standing hoax created as a social experiment. This article (sorry it is paywalled but the preview should suffice) gives some background. --SVTCobra 13:36, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chesapeake Bay monster

I removed this entry as this is supposed to be a "List of lake monsters", and Chesapeake Bay is definitely not a lake. Kelisi (talk) 07:21, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's several creatures on this list that are said to live in rivers and swamps, which are also not lakes. A bay is a little more oceanic than the rest of the list maybe, but there's not really any better list it could go on. The gist here seems to be more "local body of water" than lake specifically, but I can't think of a way to make the page title more inclusive of that without making it awkward. --Ringtail Raider (talk) 00:49, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]