Talk:Kek (mythology)

message: Um.. something is terribly wrong in this article...it needs to be wikified! JD
:The reference to internet popular culture needs to be removed entirely its absolute nonsense. It's just a namesake. "kek" = "lol". It has no relation to this deity other than it's the spelt the same. Nikolai508 (talk) 12:21, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikified... 

message: Kuk seems inexplicably similar to Huh in most details, down to the female snaky form named Kauket (compare Hauhet). Why is this? Are they the same? 98.65.164.88 (talk) 20:51, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No. The Ogdoad was an assemblage of eight gods who represented the characteristics of the chaos that, the Egyptians believed, existed before creation. Huh was infinity, Kuk was darkness, Nu was wateriness, and Amun was hiddenness. The other four members were the female counterparts of those gods, and they had the same names, with the addition a feminine suffix -t. When the Ogdoad gods are depicted together, they have uniform attributes: all the males are frogs and the females are snakes, because the Egyptians associated those creatures with water (and therefore chaos). Outside of the Ogdoad, Nu had something of an individual identity, and Amun had a fully formed iconography and characteristics, but Huh and Kuk were mostly just personifications of concepts and had little character. The four female members of the Ogdoad are even more boring. A. Parrot (talk) 21:36, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kuk = Huh? 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Kuk (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 18:14, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the move request was: Moved — JFG talk 15:44, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Kuk (mythology) →  – Per WP:COMMONNAME, 'Kek' is more popular than 'Kuk'. Per WP:TITLE, a natural disambiguation is preferable to a parenthetical if a suitable alternative is found. There is no present Wikipedia article with the title 'Kek'. 
Google searches on the two terms:
"Kek" ("Mythology" OR God) gets "About 699,000 results" while 
"Kuk" ("Mythology" OR God) gets "About 410,000 results". 
Sources that put a preference for 'Kek' over 'Kuk' include all the sources currently mentioned within the article itself:
This satisfies WP:RELIABLE. --Donenne (talk) 13:37, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

text: I have corrected it. --Donenne (talk) 02:28, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: He gets attention because he resembles a bunch of memes that 4channers are obsessed with, not because there's much to say about the god himself. The 4chan Kek phenomenon is only about six months old, and as far as I know no RSes have discussed it. Which reminds me: could somebody semiprotect this page again? The 4channers are busy. A. Parrot (talk) 01:29, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Irrespective of where this newly found interest comes from, even if it from the darkest corners of the internet, it is still interest. Just because there are individuals like 420dankmemes who are obsessed with this doesn't lessen the arguments provided above for changing the name of this article to the more common form of spelling. If you disagree with the rfc, then please post your Wikipedia-related reasons for doing so. But preventing a name change in spite of a newly created internet pseudo-religious cult has no merit among Wikipedia policies. --Donenne (talk) 03:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not opposing the name change. If anything, I'm in favor of it. I'm just saying that I'd prefer this article to be merged with Ogdoad at some point, because there's very little to say about this god by himself. His only significance in ancient Egypt is as a member of the Ogdoad. The attention that the 4channers have given to Kek might make him merit a separate article, but only if their interest in him is covered by reliable sources. So far, it isn't. A. Parrot (talk) 03:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Check out this article ZN3ukct (talk) 10:47, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I believe the BBC constitutes as a reliable source. --Donenne (talk) 05:55, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 16 September 2016 

message: Do any texts have have these two interacting? This is another example of an Egyptian deity presented in both genders and I am not sure how common that was. Ranze (talk) 05:49, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Ammit]]

message: change the empty space at the bottom with a segment on modern kek worship.
I would like to add a "revitalization" segment to the page as THOUSANDS currently worship this deity!
https://pepethefrogfaith.wordpress.com/
www.knowyourmeme.com/memes/cult-of-kek
there are even songs about him 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nak1TAx1kvs
Wew lod (talk) 04:42, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:06, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 30 November 2016 

message: The number of Kek worshipers began to increase in 2016, many of whom were also said to be part of the alt-right. A common way followers showed their appreciation for the deity was by saying "Praise Kek". They consider Pepe the Frog to be a modern form of him.
This is a possible future edit that could be made. Emily Goldstein (talk) 06:44, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: As explained in various reverts, such a report does not belong here, and may not belong in the encyclopedia at all. See WP:NOTNEWS, WP:RECENT, WP:OR for relevant policies. — JFG talk 09:18, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, the sources provided were published by WP:RS. The citations were already included and were maintained before partisan editors decided to remove them without any explanation. The onus is on you to follow WP:BRD, so until you get consensus on this talk page for the informations removal, it will keep being re-added. --Donenne (talk) 15:05, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, you've got BRD backwards. The additions of the "modern-day Internet cult of Kek" were repeatedly reverted and there was never a consensus for their inclusion. But feel free to go create Kek (Internet meme) if you feel that's encyclopedic… — JFG talk 09:22, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Firstly, there was a consensus by multiple editors, until you removed the content and cited WP:BRD. Sorry, doesn't work like that. The onus is on you to gain the consensus of editors to remove the information if you don't deem it relevant. Secondly, it is entirely relevant that a sub-culture in the 21st century revere an Ancient Egyptian deity from approx. 5000 BC, and should merit an inclusion on that deities Wikipedia page. See      Jesus for all the different religious interpretations of this deity and the denominations of those who follow said deity. You somehow have 'inside-knowledge' that the Kek being followed in the 21st century by those who purport to be adherents is not in fact the Kek of Ancient Egypt but an 'Internet meme'... i.e a completely different Kek. That's purely your opinion considering the absolute plethora of WP:RS sources/citations listed say 1. You're full of sh!t and 2. You're full of sh!t. So for every different interpretation/perspective on a deity we have to make a new Wikipedia article about it? Your logic, to put in laymen terms, is retarded and will not be tolerated on this encyclopedia.  --Donenne (talk) 09:35, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:   WP:Personal attacks such as "You're full of shit" do not help your case. I have opened a formal RfC below to resolve the content dispute. — JFG talk 10:05, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

text:  It appears you have misquoted me. I wrote "You're full of sh!t" not "You're full of shit". Infer from the last word what you will, however it is no personal attack. --Donenne (talk) 03:40, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, whatever. I'll take this as an apology… Happy new year! — JFG talk 13:20, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  In the 21st century 

message: :Note: The  was blocked for sockpuppetry. If the closure needs a review, you may go to WP:administrators' noticeboard --George Ho (talk) 17:14, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: This should also be done, but the 'cult of kek' and the term 'kek' are different concepts that, although related, are distinct when it comes to this Egyptian god (only the cult of kek meme cares about this god.  InsertCleverPhraseHere 
*Support – After reading that paper by Hine, 2016 about /pol/ I have concluded that in no uncertain terms, Kek is real, and by that I mean, real Kek ancient Egyptian deity — 67.186.241.50 (talk) 15:22, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: As nominator, I would agree with 's and 's suggestion of a Cult of Kek article which would provide a more appropriate target for disambiguation of "Kek", and would leave the article on the Egyptian concept focused on ancient mythology. — JFG talk 03:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Main points to consider: It satisfies WP:RELEVANT, as the subject matter being the deity Kek is invoked and mentioned time and time again in the context of its newly found 21st century followers and the sources from which the information is derived from satisfies WP:RELIABLE. And there certainly is no shortage of them. --Donenne (talk) 12:19, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

text: The Osiris myth is the one Egyptian myth that has any presence in pop culture, and its four main characters are the best-known Egyptian deities today. Yet I don't know how much there is to say about the cultural influence of modern retellings of the story, and I don't know of RSes that analyze the relationship between those retellings and the original myth. Kek is different, because the god has no personality in the original religion. The Ogdoad represents the infinite, formless, watery darkness that existed before creation. Nun sometimes appeared in religion and myth to represent that watery realm as a whole, Amun developed a complex theology and cult of his own, and Heh served as a symbol of infinity, but Kek played no role that I know of except as a personified concept, a mere name to fill out the rolls of the Ogdoad. And yet because of this meme, he's suddenly receiving attention and a few news articles talk about him. Whereas the Egyptian gods who are best-known today were major figures in the original religion, Kek's presence in pop culture is well out of proportion to his religious significance. A. Parrot (talk) 21:48, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - it belongs on Wikipedia, but not on this page. Especially given that an existing ref indicates the Kek meme originated with a variation of "lol", any link to the mythological figure is due to coincidentally sharing the same spelling, and nothing more. Even if someone comes to Wikipedia looking for the term, they are far more likely to land at the disambig page for Kek and not this page. From there, we should instead be linking to Pepe the Frog, or if sufficient refs then potentially create a dedicated article at either Praise Kek, Cult of Kek or (my preference) at Kek (Internet meme). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:19, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Yes, it's about time. I just posted a close request. — JFG talk 21:49, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Note: The  was blocked for sockpuppetry. If the closure needs a review, you may go to WP:administrators' noticeboard --George Ho (talk) 17:14, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC: Kek Internet cult 

message: *Oppose – Proponents are advised to create Kek (Internet meme) if they feel the topic is encyclopedic. — JFG talk 10:01, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This should also be done, but the 'cult of kek' and the term 'kek' are different concepts that, although related, are distinct when it comes to this Egyptian god (only the cult of kek meme cares about this god.  InsertCleverPhraseHere 
*Support – After reading that paper by Hine, 2016 about /pol/ I have concluded that in no uncertain terms, Kek is real, and by that I mean, real Kek ancient Egyptian deity — 67.186.241.50 (talk) 15:22, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: As nominator, I would agree with 's and 's suggestion of a Cult of Kek article which would provide a more appropriate target for disambiguation of "Kek", and would leave the article on the Egyptian concept focused on ancient mythology. — JFG talk 03:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: *Support - Firstly, the following Kek has received has been covered by WP:RS, as listed above. Secondly, the increase in popularity of this deity is highly relevant to the article, considering that the God itself is ancient from a now non-existent civilisation. The abundance of sources documenting this phenomena also lends weight to the argument that this new popularity ought to be included somewhere within the article. The nominator somehow either A.) Thinks that the Kek being worshipped is not the 'real' Kek and is some sort of new 'trendy' internet cult or B.) The fact that this newly emerged interest began on the internet somehow disqualifies these peoples beliefs as being 'genuine' and therefore merits no consideration. Both these points are absurd and have no Wikipedia precedence behind them . I find it puzzling that a sub-standard Wikipedia editor can have the audacity to make either assertion in regards to a chosen religion/creed/philosophy. 
:Main points to consider: It satisfies WP:RELEVANT, as the subject matter being the deity Kek is invoked and mentioned time and time again in the context of its newly found 21st century followers and the sources from which the information is derived from satisfies WP:RELIABLE. And there certainly is no shortage of them. --Donenne (talk) 12:19, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The Osiris myth is the one Egyptian myth that has any presence in pop culture, and its four main characters are the best-known Egyptian deities today. Yet I don't know how much there is to say about the cultural influence of modern retellings of the story, and I don't know of RSes that analyze the relationship between those retellings and the original myth. Kek is different, because the god has no personality in the original religion. The Ogdoad represents the infinite, formless, watery darkness that existed before creation. Nun sometimes appeared in religion and myth to represent that watery realm as a whole, Amun developed a complex theology and cult of his own, and Heh served as a symbol of infinity, but Kek played no role that I know of except as a personified concept, a mere name to fill out the rolls of the Ogdoad. And yet because of this meme, he's suddenly receiving attention and a few news articles talk about him. Whereas the Egyptian gods who are best-known today were major figures in the original religion, Kek's presence in pop culture is well out of proportion to his religious significance. A. Parrot (talk) 21:48, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - it belongs on Wikipedia, but not on this page. Especially given that an existing ref indicates the Kek meme originated with a variation of "lol", any link to the mythological figure is due to coincidentally sharing the same spelling, and nothing more. Even if someone comes to Wikipedia looking for the term, they are far more likely to land at the disambig page for Kek and not this page. From there, we should instead be linking to Pepe the Frog, or if sufficient refs then potentially create a dedicated article at either Praise Kek, Cult of Kek or (my preference) at Kek (Internet meme). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:19, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Yes, it's about time. I just posted a close request. — JFG talk 21:49, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Note: The  was blocked for sockpuppetry. If the closure needs a review, you may go to WP:administrators' noticeboard --George Ho (talk) 17:14, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: There's a lot more to add - one example: the coincidence that in popular culture (also among 4chan), "kek" is a euphemism for laughter, though this isn't directly related to the Egyptian God.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by SixMillionStrong (talk • contribs) 13:23, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: That is covered over at the Pepe the frog page, and is not relevant here. — InsertCleverPhraseHere 22:08, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  There's a lot more to add to the "popular culture" seciton.  

message: — Assignment last updated by Avsbertonneau (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: HUM 202 - Introduction to Mythology