Talk:Great Old One

message: After checking the list of Great Old Ones I noticed that Azathoth was on the list. Azathoth being the center of the universe is clearly an Outer God. Sorry if this seems like a minor thing to point out but i figured it should be mentioned. 68.194.36.46 02:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Azathoth

message: ===New request===
Update. I notice that a move to Great Old One was effected, so I deleted the move request template. -,-~R'lyehRising~-,- 18:38, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose the move back to singular -- Words that are only known in collective plural forms have article titles that are plural, per discussion below. DreamGuy 17:49, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

text: * Comment. One reason I favor a move is because at least 30+ articles link here thru the singular Great Old One redirect. To satisfy certain Wikipedians who detest redirects, fixing these links would require awkward piped links like:Great Old OneThe opposite (plural linking to the singular) is much easier to deal with, i.e.:Great Old Ones(In fact, this is probably why Wikipedia prefers singular nouns in the first place.)RlyehRising 04:18, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

text: *:Regarding that last point: Yes, I am the undisputed master of the understatement... all together now: "Well, duhhhhhhhhhhh..."-,-~R'lyehRising~-,- 19:56, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

text: BTW. For what it's worth...on my talk page, User:Bryan Derksen agreed that Great Old Ones should be moved back to Great Old One. RlyehRising 00:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I'm not familiar with the subtelties of this, but I followed through with your move request, taking into account that the article itself uses "Great Old Ones", and that a reference at the bottom also uses this. If the move needs to be undone, let me know and I'll be glad to help out. --HappyCamper 13:48, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The wheels turn fast on Wikipedia! If no one objects to this move, I think this will be final word. Gate2ValusiaOh?..(contribs) 13:56, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I believe this is called "WikiBoldness" WP:BOLD :-) --HappyCamper 17:24, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, I believe all these editors are long gone, but this article needs a major overhaul, given the amount of speculation, colloquial language and focus on extraneous material that wasn't even created by Lovecraft. PurpleHeartEditor (talk) 02:06, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: Update. I notice that a move to Great Old One was effected, so I deleted the move request template. -,-~R'lyehRising~-,- 18:38, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose the move back to singular -- Words that are only known in collective plural forms have article titles that are plural, per discussion below. DreamGuy 17:49, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

text: * Comment. One reason I favor a move is because at least 30+ articles link here thru the singular Great Old One redirect. To satisfy certain Wikipedians who detest redirects, fixing these links would require awkward piped links like:Great Old OneThe opposite (plural linking to the singular) is much easier to deal with, i.e.:Great Old Ones(In fact, this is probably why Wikipedia prefers singular nouns in the first place.)RlyehRising 04:18, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

text: *:Regarding that last point: Yes, I am the undisputed master of the understatement... all together now: "Well, duhhhhhhhhhhh..."-,-~R'lyehRising~-,- 19:56, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

text: BTW. For what it's worth...on my talk page, User:Bryan Derksen agreed that Great Old Ones should be moved back to Great Old One. RlyehRising 00:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New request

message: Shouldn't this article be under the plural title of Great Old Ones, not the singular, because it's talking about them collectively?
* There is a simple answer to this question: No. The reason is because Wikipedia's naming conventions for titles specifies that articles should always be titled (whenever possible) in the singular. I agree that "Great Old Ones" would be more logical, but then this is Wikipedia and not Cthulhipedia (though I wish there was such a thing!), so we have to play by their rules. Gate2ValusiaOh?..(contribs) 09:48, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not familiar with the subtelties of this, but I followed through with your move request, taking into account that the article itself uses "Great Old Ones", and that a reference at the bottom also uses this. If the move needs to be undone, let me know and I'll be glad to help out. --HappyCamper 13:48, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The wheels turn fast on Wikipedia! If no one objects to this move, I think this will be final word. Gate2ValusiaOh?..(contribs) 13:56, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I believe this is called "WikiBoldness" WP:BOLD :-) --HappyCamper 17:24, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, I believe all these editors are long gone, but this article needs a major overhaul, given the amount of speculation, colloquial language and focus on extraneous material that wasn't even created by Lovecraft. PurpleHeartEditor (talk) 02:06, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive

message: I noticed that a user changed Gol-goroth to Gol-Goroth; since no references for this change was cited, I changed it back given the following rationale:
I have four references that support the spelling Gol-goroth. In Robert E. Howard's "The Gods of Bal-Sagoth" (1931)—the story that introduces the deity—the following paragraph appears (italics added for emphasis):
There are many gods in Bal-Sagoth, but the greatest of all is Gol-goroth, the god of darkness who sits forever in the Temple of Shadows... I forbade men to worship Gol-goroth... I had strong men take heavy hammers and smite the image of Gol-goroth, but their blows only shattered the hammers and gave strange hurts to the men who wielded them.
In C. J. Henderson's "Free the Old Ones" (1995), the sudden inclusion of the "Old Ones" into  popular culture leads the protagonist to ponder their various names: "There were... figures identified as Y'golonac, Daoloth, Shub-Niggurath, Glaaki, Eihort, Byatis, and the like. My personal favorite was 'Gol-goroth, the forgotten Old One', more for the lurid title he had been gifted with than anything else."
In "The Fishers from Outside" (1988), Lin Carter drops the hyphen and uses the spelling Golgoroth. For example, in one passage we learn that Abdul Alhazred in the Necronomicon stated that "the Fishers were the minions or servants of the demon Golgoroth, who had anciently been worshipped on Bal-Sagoth".
In addition, Daniel Harms uses the spelling Gol-goroth in his article about the deity in The Encyclopedia Cthulhiana (pp. 124–5). 
I realize this is overkill, but I hope I have at least supported my case for using the spelling Gol-goroth (and if nothing else, perhaps this gives more insight into this particular Great Old One).
*Robert E. Howard, "The Gods of Bal-Sagoth", The Dark Man and Others, pp. 104. New York, NY: Lancer Books, 1963.
*C. J. Henderson, "Free the Old Ones", Made In Goatswood, pp. 194. Scott David Aniolowski (ed). Oakland, CA: Chaosium, 1995. .
*Lin Carter, "The Fishers from Outside", The New Lovecraft Circle, pp. 90. Robert M. Price (ed.), New York, NY: Random House, 1996. .
RlyehRising 19:57, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gol-goroth 

message: Found the origin of Ammutseba- appeares in "Lost Stars" fromSTRANGE STARS & ALIEN SHADOWS 2003. 
This comes from "http://www.geocities.com/hpl4ever/"
New Babylon 12:34, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ammutseba

message: Link to an online source on Tarapithia:
[]
[]
FINALY found a story with Tarapithia-though its an onine story,it could count.Its on more then one page too: []
[]
New Babylon 2 17:44, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tarapithia

message: Wow, when I put this thing up here I had no idea he would eventually become so popular as to register on Google, CBR, and Fanfiction.net. I expected him to get deleted, for goodness' sakes. But, uh, I suppose it's better to let everyone know late than never?
There's a manuscript involving him, but that doesn't really count as verifiable. Does adventure material for Call of Cthulhu? I wonder...
He does have stats...
Dr. ROFLPWN (talk) 05:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: X'chll'at-aa

message: the table appears completely broken to me, possibly an exercise in the madness that lies beyond geometry?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.113.57.173 (talk) 23:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  broken table 

message: This is my first time doing anything on the wikipedia so please forgive any errors in formating or spelling but if I'm not mistaken the name Sheogorath is a reference to one of the programmers (I think his name is Theodore) of the Elder Scrolls, not Shoggoths (although I am aware that there are references to the Great Old Ones in the the Elder Scrolls). 67.71.16.118 (talk) 20:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sheogorath 

message: It breaks the NPOV rule to describe the cultists who worship the Great Old Ones as 'deranged'. Try putting that kind of language in the Scientology articles and see what happens to you. 
I'aa ftagn! 86.30.203.252 (talk) 16:26, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Description: "Presumably a gigantic crab.".. nice phrasing :)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lessthanideal (talk • contribs) 22:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basatan	: Master of the Crabs 

message: The "In popular culture" section, most of them are trivial claim that something is similar to GOO without source. Some of them violate WP:SELF while other cite unreliable source like open wiki. L-Zwei (talk) 18:53, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal