Talk:Leeroy Jenkins

Origin of the name

If anyone hasn't noticed, the origin of the name Leeroy Jenkins might come from a TV Evangelist. No, I'm not kidding. I was watching the History Channel, and there was a Televangelist named LeRoy Jenkins. He's the guy who sells "Miracle Water." It's pronounced "Le" as in "lead" and then "roy," different than "Leeroy." Anyways, thought I'd stick taht up... seeing as Leeroy was a paladin... LeRoy sells healing waters... I dunno, seems like that's where he got the name.

Link: http://www.religionnewsblog.com/3585/state-orders-evangelist-to-stop-selling-miracle-water —Preceding unsigned comment added by IronCrow (talk • contribs) 08:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Racism Revisited

I wonder if any of the comments in the "Racism?" section (above) were posted by people of color. My guess is probably not. But that's not important - in the online realm, reason and logic alone should guide these discussions. Unfortunately, I see little of that. Only one poster cited evidence - an article which states the following:

"One forty-ounce-malt-liquor-fueled night when he was getting his electrical-engineering degree, [...] Ben and his friends decided to create the most culturally inappropriate character names imaginable for a bunch of white guys playing video games. Out of Ben's inebriated mouth tumbled "Leeroy Jenkins," a moniker so amusing that he decided to use it for his characters in assorted games -- and, ultimately, World of Warcraft."

We can't simply ask Wikipedians of color whether Leeroy Jenkins is offensive to them. For better or worse, that's not how it works here. What we can and should do is examine Ben Schulz's comment in light of the above quote.

As I see it, Schultz chose the name "Leeroy Jenkins" because of the absurdity (in his mind) of attaching a "black" name to his white avatars. The intonation of his in-game exclamation and later response to other players strongly suggest that he attempts to convey his idea of a "black" persona as well. If we can agree on this much, then it follows that Schultz's belief that stating "at least I have chicken" fits a "black" persona is, indeed, racist. sæ (talk) 21:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

No, we should't examine anything. Thats what WP:NOR is all about. We can state that the name was chosen has a culturally inappropriate name, but we cannot speculate as to why that was the case. Metao (talk) 01:20, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I think you might be corect. It seems that the production of scholarly sources simply cannot keep up with an information superhighway in constant need of self-analysis. Given the key role this site plays in internet culture, this is highly problematic. I consider the talk page to be part of the article, and that anybody researching anything vaguely contested should come here... The scholars of digital culture who are likely to write to sources that we are allowed to cite certainally will! If we think an issue matters, then it is good practise to discuss it here, as it is only one click away from the main article, and so that as soon as the pending scholarly source is published, we can stick it right into the main one, having already done the discussion. Courtesy of Gavla 04:11, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

No mention at all about SpikeTV commercials parodying?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiBfF0cSEeM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZjXqXkJ0_Y&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTDqClH0zGo&feature=related

These three videos commercials played on Spike TV, before the date mentioned at the end of the commercial. Unfortunately, I do not remember which year. Could someone gather and put up the information on this? I'm a bit busy. Ulgar (talk) 00:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

The mentions have been there and were removed due to being unreferenced. Metao (talk) 01:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

You might try http://www.lunabean.com/news/20061207_spike_tv_leeroy.php as a likely source. Metao (talk) 01:42, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Article doesn't explain satisfactorily

The article implies that LJ is a character in the game, but he is not. LJ is apparently a fictional game player - the in-game character did not have the monicker "LJ", but the voice of the person playing him did. This isn't made clear in the article either. In fact, no mention is made at all of who voiced LJ in the video. (In effect, which "actor" played the part.) This article is poorly written at present.68.145.161.33 (talk) 13:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I couldn't make heads or tails of it. --71.126.140.46 (talk) 05:33, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Was it real or a high dollar big media company product team campaign? If so, what was the target of the campaign? The video game? FireAi.one (talk) 19:26, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Dead link to Armed Forces Journal Article

In this article, this interesting and valuable point " The meme spread further in 2009, when the Armed Forces Journal published an article titled "Let's Do This!: Leeroy Jenkins and the American Way of Advising". The article, by Capt. Robert M Chamberlain, links Jenkins to the American approach to advising Iraq.[11]" is a reference to this article: http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2009/06/4036672/ this link is dead. The article appears to be copied on this forum: http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/middle-east-north-africa/52891-let-s-do-leeroy-jenkins-american-way-advising.html but I can't confirm that this is the exact same article. What should be done about this?206.217.95.210 (talk) 22:27, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Legacy section?

I think this article should have a "legacy" section or have its "Reaction" section re-written to incorporate what could be considered legacy (ex. parodies made long after the original video). (Here's an example of a more recent parody.) The current "Reaction" section only has what occurred soon after the video was uploaded, whereas a "Legacy" section would have content that was created quite a bit after the fact. A merged "Reaction/ Legacy" section would have both. -- Gestrid (talk) 06:29, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Use of YouTube videos as references

Some seem to disagree with this. Why? YouTube links are the exact content that needs to be sourced. I do not see the problem. As for copyright, short videos of film/TV references are protected under fair use. This is a non-issue. --82.24.5.56 (talk) 00:44, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

It's a problem because of our user-generated content policy, which says Content from websites whose content is largely user-generated is... generally unacceptable. — Gestrid (talk) 00:56, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

The only (likely) way this wouldn't apply is if it were from an official, verified YouTube channel (a YouTube channel with the checkmark next to the channel name). — Gestrid (talk) 01:03, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

While I can appreciate that, the fact remains that my references are the source material, and you won't get a better reference. Things like trivia will only be cited through user-submitted media, because the copyright holders for the media in question have no reason to host the references themselves. (Keep in mind it is fair use to upload short clips as I said.) I'm not sure how a verified icon on YouTube could be counted as the be-all and end-all of a legitimate source. Let's be honest: a lot of verified channels host content that is questionable in nature, and them being verified doesn't change the fact a channel doesn't hold the copyright, so I see it as a moot point. For instance, would a video reference of PewDiePie screaming while playing something particular (to be referenced) in a video game be regarded as more legitimate than a video just showing the reference alone from an unpopular and unverified channel? I hope you can see what I mean.

I wish I could see things the way long-time editors here do, but it comes across as awfully anal and I think time could be better spent on things that matter. It ruins the fun and discourages smaller occasional contributors who mean no harm. I just spent a little time referencing what is literally the source, and it's useful information on Leeroy Jenkins that simply adds to the article. I don't see why editors should wipe that away for the sake of something so draconian.

82.24.5.56 (talk) 02:01, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

It's helpful to read the relevant guidelines at MOS:POPCULT. Here's the bigger issue, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a compendium of trivia. That something is referenced by a TV show or whatever is trivia. If instead you can find a source that discusses the subject's (in this case the Leeroy Jenkins meme) use as a reference in various media then that would be encyclopedic -- it would help readers understand how the subject has been represented in media at large instead of just being a list of occurrences.

Following on that, we cannot just list things and expect readers to figure out the significance. We must provide the explanation that we summarize from an existing reliable source that we then supply a citation for. None of what you added back in meets any of these requirements.

Further, some of these are copyright violations which cannot allow to stay. Period. Yes, there are fair use exemptions possible but since your edit doesn't meet any other standards required by Wikipedia these are just straight up clear violations (WP:COPYVIO) of the policy against linking to copyright violations. I've removed what I think are the clear copyright violations (left a few in that do not appear to be copyright violations). We need to have very good arguments in line with Wikpedia policy and guidelines before allowing those links. The others need good arguments in line with Wikipedia policy and guidelines in order to justify keeping them here. As it stands they appear to be unencyclopedic content, trivia, according to Wikipedia guidelines and should be removed as well. SQGibbon (talk) 19:34, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Also, while adding the links may or may not have been a copyright violation, they were linking to possibly copyrighted content, which we can't allow. — Gestrid (talk) 22:26, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

We can link to copyrighted material as long as it is all properly licensed from the owner of the copyright and/or the website with the material. Heck, pretty much everything linked to from Wikipedia is copyrighted, the question is whether it's properly licensed. So that's what I meant by stressing the copyright violation aspect -- if the material isn't licensed for distribution on Youtube then it is a copyright violation and we cannot link to it (except possibly under a fair use exemption -- which I don't think has been established in this case). SQGibbon (talk) 01:13, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

A lot of articles (rather than videos) linked to on Wikipedia are from websites where a verification of licensing cannot be easily attained. Furthermore, a lot of articles link to copyrighted videos from an unverified source. I don't see how this is so different. But fair enough as rules are rules. It seems contributing to Wikipedia is always an uphill battle, but thanks anyway.

82.24.5.56 (talk) 01:19, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

The thing about Wikipedia is that there are millions of articles, many of which haven't been seen or touched in years. Many of the articles were either last edited before many of our rules came about or were edited by an ignorant user who didn't know better (much like happened with me when I first registered an account) and nobody noticed it for one reason or another. — Gestrid (talk) 05:09, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Racist Origins

It's funny that people are denying the fact that Leeroy Jenkins is racist. The creator admitted the name is "culturally inappropriate," the character has the darkest shade of skin possible on a WoW character at the time, the other characters in the guild have stereotypically black sounding names like "Jamaal" "Abdul" "Juron", he is loud and dumb, he is affecting a stereotypically black voice and he talks about chicken. The character is supposed to be a black minstrel stereotype.

It should be in the article that Leeroy is racist.

68.225.220.46 (talk) 21:40, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

If someone is interested to put something about this into the article, there is some literature about this. I have written the German article about Leeroy Jenkins and added a "criticism"-section there. I have used the following literature:

• Jessie Daniels, Nick LaLone (2012). "Racism in Video Gaming. Connecting Extremist and Mainstream Expressions of White Supremacy". Social Exclusion, Power, and Video Game Play. New Research in Digital Media and Technology. Plymouth: Lexington Books. pp. 85–100. ISBN 978-0-7391-3862-5. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |editors= ignored (|editor= suggested) (help)
• Tanner Higgin (2009). "Blackless Fantasy. The Disappearance of Race in Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games" (PDF). Games and Culture. 4 (1): 3–26.

--Redrobsche (talk) 16:02, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I added this to the page with the citations given. - Handamoniumflows (talk) 15:01, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

This was removed from the article despite multiple citations. I am wondering what would be required to include it again, as the content is not in question despite being controversial. The racial component was pronounced at the origin of the meme and is preserved through Internet Archive's materials related to the guild he was a part of. I can provide more citations and evidence if that could lead to restoration of the article section. Handamoniumflows (talk) 16:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

I have made the same experience in the German Wikipedia. The section was removed several times by different users because it would be "poor scientific work", "not relevant", or "Zeitgeist excesses". Maybe the removing user FMSky likes to explain the removal. --Redrobsche (talk) 21:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

This isn't really a thing that's widely discussed and we shouldn't give too much weight to fringe theories, see WP:DUE --FMSky (talk) 05:14, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Leeroy Jenkins Name Origins

The origin may not be fully known (and may never actually be pinned down specifically) but it certainly did NOT begin with WoW in 2005. I recall Adventurequest having a leero jenkins quest (with the exact name and famous yell) occurring, which was created before that video ever came out. The phrase itself is older than WoW and Blizzard is a piece of crap for trying to act like they created it. They might have popularized it but that is NOT creation.

Where is Leeroy now?

Was this whole thing a spun up social media promo created by a big media company like Sirius XM Satellite Radio? FireAi.one (talk) 19:24, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Other appearances

Currently this section is essentially an "in popular culture" section and most of the examples are non-notable; it's already tagged for being WP:OR. Personally I'd propose deleting this section in its entirety. All these examples are references to the meme and there's not a strong standard of noteworthiness on any of them; TVTropes exists for people who want a list of every time someone made the reference. At a minimum I think it should be retitled to "In Popular Culture" since the rest of the article describes a player character and these aren't appearances of that character, just references to them (the inclusion of them in a later WoW expansion or Hearthstone would qualify as both an appearance and noteworthy, but both are mentioned in the section above). I don't feel super strongly about it though; anyone else have thoughts? Dylnuge ^{(Talk • Edits)} 03:02, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Some, that got noted in reliable sources, can stay, but most of the list should go, because it is original research. Anything left should be rewritten in prose, not a list, because that invites additional cruft to be added, and put in context. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:01, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

I took a crack at revising it and merging it with the above section. I dropped a bunch of the references, since it just seem worth having a massive list when a handful of examples can make the same point. Hopefully this is somewhat better. Dylnuge ^{(Talk • Edits)} 00:23, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Also mentioned in Charles Stross' novel The Apocalypse Codex, where one of the characters has a "WWLJD" bracelet (as she explains at one point, "What Would Leeroy Jenkins Do?") ELSchissel (talk) 22:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Reference to Leroy Jenkins in Psych Season Six Episode 2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psych_(season_6)

Leroy Jenkins was a name of a character used in this episode with the main character Shawn saying the name as it appears in the video. 2601:681:5902:63F0:50D3:E52F:A0EA:1B8D (talk) 19:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, wasn't logged in when I posted this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drdavis (talk • contribs) 19:31, 13 April 2023 (UTC)