This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles
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
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
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
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occult, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the occult 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.OccultWikipedia:WikiProject OccultTemplate:WikiProject OccultOccult articles
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 articles
Latest comment: 2 years ago10 comments6 people in discussion
Picking up from where we left off - what should we merge from Werewolves in popular culture, where should we merge it, and what should be left behind? Happy to take the lead on this, but input most welcome (especially since I consider myself more dovish on the pruning). Please discuss specific entries or categories you'd like to see merged or left behind Feel also free to open subsections to this discussion to narrow the discussion to selected elements. Thank you all. Pilaz (talk) 18:54, 28 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
My personal assessment is that the following categories are compliant with WP:NLIST[1]: literature[2][3][4][5]; film[6][7]; television[7][8]; music[9]; video games[10]; anime and manga[11]. Non-compliant with WP:NLIST: (non-manga) comics; (non-anime) cartoons. The latter two are not discussed extensively as a category by any scholarly or other reliable source that I could find, with the exception of one footnote. Pilaz (talk) 19:06, 28 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
I like these limitations for sections as well. I'd also limit this to only include entries where:
Either the work in question (series or individual work) OR the author has an article establishing notability AND
Where the werewolves are identified as werewolves in a sufficient enough fashion (ie, no shapeshifters where they can take any form) in either the work or in secondary, independent reliable sources AND
Where the werewolves have been covered in secondary, independent and reliable sources.
Point three may seem redundant to the second, but each point covers different areas. Point two is meant to allow for the addition of works where the werewolves aren't identified as such in the work in question, but are described as such in RS. This would exclude things like Animorphs, where the characters can change into generally any creature, unless there is a lot of independent, reliable sources that specifically discuss the character in regards to lycanthropy. I'd consider Animorphs to fall into the world of shapeshifters since they're not limited to wolves. Point three is to keep the list from including works where the werewolves are only briefly mentioned or aren't a supporting or major plot point in the work in question. My concern is that we'll get some of people saying that since Work A has a fantasy setting where someone mentions werewolves a couple of times in passing, that it should be included on the list. The list isn't meant to be an exhaustive mention of all notable works that includes some mention of werewolves, rather a list of works where werewolves played a reasonably major role. I don't really see the point in including passing or minor mentions of werewolves. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:10, 29 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
A bit of a coda to the first point: I'm aware that some of the oldest works don't have articles. If there is enough coverage to establish where the subject could conceivably have an article (but just hasn't been written yet) it would still pass notability guidelines. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:12, 29 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
However age doesn't automatically mean notability, so this proof of notability would still need to be established. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:13, 29 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
All of these sound like sound constraints. On the topic of works that don't have articles but might be notable, it can be quite quick to establish notability by making a stub article which references 2 WP:NBOOK reviews. In general this list does not interest me much but I am happy to find reviews & make such stubs if you want to tag me in for specific works. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Thanks Pilaz for digging up those sources! Otherwise, what is the aim here? It's nice to have these groupings established, but is there a reason to exclude examples outside these groups if they are supported by secondary sources? As usual, I am especially interested in role-playing games, and there are scholarly sources which do discuss individual examples like the werewolf in Dungeons & Dragons, like this paper. And I am sure the Werewolf games by White Wolf have garnered attention, though I haven't looked yet. Interestingly, looking for werewolves in RPGs in general is not so easy because there has been a lot of scholarly attention on an example of a non-traditional-table-top RPG which we haven't yet included in either list, Are You a Werewolf?. In the end this is a list, which we can expect to go beyond, and which we do not want to duplicate, the Werewolf fiction prose article (which in turn might benefit from some of the sources presented here). Daranios (talk) 07:31, 30 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
^Per the guideline: The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been. Because the group or set is notable, the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable, although editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles.
^Crossen, Carys (2019). The Nature of the Beast: Transformations of the Werewolf from the 1970s to the Twenty-First Century. University of Wales Press. ISBN9781786834577.
^Frost, Brian J. (2003). The Essential Guide to Werewolf Literature. University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN9780879728601.
^Priest, Hannah (2015). She-wolf: a Cultural History of Female Werewolves. Manchester University Press. ISBN9780719089343.
^Summers, Montague (2003) [First published in 1933]. The Werewolf in Lore and Legend. Dover Publications. ISBN0486430901.
^Mann, Craig Ian (2020). Phases of the Moon: A Cultural History of the Werewolf Film. Edinburgh University Press. ISBN9781474441148.
^ abMcMahon-Coleman, Kimberley; Weaver, Roslyn (2014). Werewolves and Other Shapeshifters in Popular Culture: A Thematic Analysis of Recent Depictions. McFarland. ISBN9780786492503.
^Jowett, Lorna (2017). "White Trash in Wife-Beaters? U.S. Television Werewolves, Gender, and Class". In Belau, Linda; Jackson, Kimberly (eds.). Horror Television in the Age of Consumption. Routledge. ISBN9781315179414.
.png){kind=small}
