Talk:List of fictional worms

message: I've removed the mention of Beowulf (again) - the issue is whether that worm is sufficiently notable and also widely known as a worm as opposed to as a serpent or whatever to be added to the list. The fact that it doesn't have a name with "worm" in the title is my main issue - it doesn't seem to be commonly known as a worm, even if it is referred to one in some translations of Beowolf into modern English. According to Wiktionary, "worm" is not an appropriate translation of wyrm - the translations given are "dragon" and "snake" Claritas §  11:41, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Beowulf dies after his battle with the 'worm' - that makes it a notable fictional character worthy of inclusion here. From William Morris's rendition - "...Beowulf  draws his sax, and between them they slay the Worm. Beowulf now feels his wounds, and knows that he is hurt deadly..." . The translations go on and on and some recent ones still use 'worm', see a 1978 translation by Charles William Kennedy, published by Oxford University Press, . I see 161 results for "Beowulf worm" in Gbooks. (Those readers who can't see Google Book results may of course ask for quotes). Also lots in Google Scholar, not surprising. But one good modern book ref, the one that was removed mentioning instances, really should be enough to establish its standing for inclusion here. Further discussion of its translation as a worm, a dragon, or a serpent could go into the Beowulf article itself. Or wherever. Wiktionary, as a user-edited Wiki, is not a reliable source. Novickas (talk) 19:45, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  True. I'm going to re-include it, as I'm pretty much convinced by your arguments. We, however, do need to decide on the inclusion criteria for this list, to prevent it violating WP:IINFO and WP:NOTDIR, which were cited as problems during the AFD debate. I'm uncertain where to start. Claritas §  19:57, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad we could agree on the Beowulf worm. About other content, I'd guess that some of the recent movie, video game, TV show content might or might not be appropriate. The primary sources might describe "long, slimy, yucky, earth-dwelling creatures" and then secondary sources (I don't know howto evaluate them) might go on to call them worms. But that would be one place to start. Novickas (talk) 22:04, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  How about this criteria then: we only include "worms" if their name contains the word "worm", or if they are biologically earthworms or members of a species whose common name contains the word worm, or are frequently referred to, in the case of literature, in the primary text as a worm, or in the case of television programs etc. where such description may not be required in the primary text, in reliable secondary sources. I think that's broad enough to include most entries on the list, while giving the list firm inclusion criteria so it will actually be useful. Claritas §  12:11, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sounds reasonable to me. But could you please observe WP:BEFORE B4 deleting entries, I know B4 is not a policy and editors may have included some marginal creatures, but yesterday's pop culture editors, who may have added marginal entries here, may well morph into tomorrow's serious editors, and I'd like to see them treated gently. Novickas (talk) 19:41, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  From my experience recentchange/newpage patrolling, it's generally better to remove the "marginal" content, and then calmly explaining the issue with it with the editors who added it originally if they wish it to be kept. Claritas §  19:48, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beowulf 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of fictional worms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090412154903/http://jedidictionary.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=9 to http://jedidictionary.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=9
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:54, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Most of them aren't really worms
82.17.164.224 (talk) 14:05, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: The mythology section

message: yeah,  Alaskan Bull Worm needs its article 2A02:C7C:DB71:7900:A509:50C8:AB28:46F8 (talk) 19:42, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  They should have a article for Alaskan Bull Worm