Talk:Freak
Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Freak article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
- Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
- New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.
- Assume good faith
- Be polite and avoid personal attacks
- Be welcoming to newcomers
- Seek dispute resolution if needed
Article policies
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 8 January 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Body Modification, a project which is currently considered to be defunct .Body ModificationWikipedia:WikiProject Body ModificationTemplate:WikiProject Body ModificationBody Modification
WikiProject icon Freak is within the scope of WikiProject Disability . For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine , which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine .MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Popular culture, a project which is currently considered to be inactive .Popular cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Popular cultureTemplate:WikiProject Popular culturePopular culture
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination , a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination 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.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
"Freaks"
[edit ]There is a move discussion at Talk:Freaks#Requested move 12 May 2019 proposing that there is no primary topic for the plural which is currently about a film. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:45, 12 May 2019 (UTC) [reply ]
@GenQuest: I added "monster" to the "See also" list and was reverted with a vague summary "not needed". I think the cultural concepts of freaks and monsters are closely related and often overlap, and there is value in linking one to the other. Arguments to the contrary? —swpb T • go beyond • bad idea 13:39, 25 April 2022 (UTC) [reply ]
- @Swpb: The word, Freaks, in this usage does not refer to monsters, the word is in reference to people. Human beings. People are not monsters. Any relation between the two are tenuous at best. I can see no value added using that word/link here in this particular article. GenQuest "scribble" 19:03, 25 April 2022 (UTC) [reply ]
- Obviously they're not the same thing; if they were, they'd be the same article. That's not what "See also" means. I can read as well as anyone that this article is about humans. But there is a huge cultural association throughout history of deformed but otherwise perfectly natural humans with supernatural powers and phenomena. One could write a full, well-sourced section on that association, probably a whole article. —swpb T • go beyond • bad idea 14:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC) [reply ]
- "Supernatural powers and phenomena"? That doesn't equate to monsters either. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:46, 28 April 2022 (UTC) [reply ]
- Obviously they're not the same thing; if they were, they'd be the same article. That's not what "See also" means. I can read as well as anyone that this article is about humans. But there is a huge cultural association throughout history of deformed but otherwise perfectly natural humans with supernatural powers and phenomena. One could write a full, well-sourced section on that association, probably a whole article. —swpb T • go beyond • bad idea 14:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC) [reply ]
- I agree with GenQuest. There is no strong connection between the two terms. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:08, 25 April 2022 (UTC) [reply ]