Talk:Boggart

message: this 'farmer & the boggart' tale which has completely replaced all the other text on the page is spurious - it is fine to have it included *as part of* the wider definition, but completely wrong for it to be the only text on the page.
Star-one (talk) 14:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The "old" tale concerning potatoes is unlikely to be more ancient than the C19: I guess that's "really really old"...--Wetman (talk) 04:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Farmer and boggart tale

message: I can find no evidence anywhere that the word bogart, with one -g- is ever an instance of boggart with a different spelling. The only assertions of that claim are those at the top of this article, and near the end of the linked page bogart (disambiguation). All the examples on this page of the magical or "faerie" creature of myth or fantasy use the spelling -gg-; and the OED only lists boggard, boggart and then adds "also buggard".  Wiktionary for bogart only lists the meanings associated with Humphrey Bogart, to do with smoking. The Wiktionary for boggart does not say it can also be spelled with one -g-. Now, the Wiktionary articles could be as unsafe as the Wikipedia ones; however they seem (at the time I just looked) to agree with external evidence, namely that here are two different words, one entirely modern spelled like and originating with the surname of the actor Humphrey of that ilk, and the centuries-old word for the magical creature, with -gg-, as documented in OED 1st edition.
Iph (talk) 10:35, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The name Bogart is of Dutch origin (from bogaard, more fully, boomgaard), and means "orchard".  It has nothing to do with the English word boggart.  J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 23:11, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  One -g- spelling is a different word 

message: A variant of boggart not mentioned in the article is booger, which is known from Appalachian folklore (see Chase, The Grandfather Tales) and African-American folklore (sometimes as "boogie").  Both traditions probably get the term, if not the concept, from Scotch-Irish English.  In vernacular American English, booger and boogie have come to mean thing (often unpleasant or unmentionable), and so, by extension, a gob of snot and (as "woolly booger") the pudendum muliebris, whence "boogie-woogie" music.  Somebody with the time to look up authorities should add a section on this to the article.  J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 23:03, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Booger" 

message: The lead section says: ""  
But the main body says (emphasis added): ""
There seems to be some contradiction here? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:27, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Young seems to have not researched the connection between marshland and boggarts very exhaustively. I found, on a cursory Google Books search, an 1891 account of Lincolnshire follklore that directly described boggarts inhabiting bog land, and things termed 'swamp bogles',. I suspect that editors relying on Young's unsubstantiated statements about boggarts not being associated with marshes is the root of the problem. Urselius (talk) 10:38, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I think you could be right. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marshes 

message: In the "Background" header section the following sentence has no source, having been added about 19 years ago at the time of writing by a anonymous user:
Added a "Citation needed" as a minor edit but unsure if it should be fully eliminated due to being unsubstantiated.
Sylph-Glyph (talk) 23:16, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The assertion is supported by a citation at the end of the Grizlehurst Boggart section, I have moved it. I have added another supporting citation with a new reference. What I don't understand is why add a citation needed flag, research when the assertion was added and then add a section to the talk page, when it is just as easy to find references online (I did it using Google Books) and repair a deficiency yourself? Urselius (talk) 10:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I attempted to find any sources discussing it but couldn't, mistake on my part. The references you have added seem to fit. Thanks so much. Sylph-Glyph (talk) 16:38, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  True-name section 

message: Articles are supposed to have a lead section that provides a summary of the entre article. The current content of the opening paragraph seems to be unique and probably belongs in its own section, whatever heading can be given. "Background" was just a first stab. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, but don't have a creative suggestion for a heading. So just have something like "A boggart is a usually malevolent supernatural being from English folklore." as the lead, and shift everything afterwards into a "Background" section? Daranios (talk) 18:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Ha. That sounds somewhat familiar! Martinevans123 (talk) 20:18, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead section