Talk:Phthonus

How on Earth
How on Earth do people spot vandalism and revert it this quickly on pages this obscure? Genuine question, I'd love to help revert vandalism myself but I don't know where to find it. GenericName1108 (talk) 07:35, 27 May 2021 (UTC)


 * , it's done using Huggle on this page in specific, a tool used that can be set up to detect vandalism based on.. something I'm not entirely sure of, I think it's like keywords or regex or something. The bots have figured out that edits including SCP related phrases on this page are almost always vandalism, and reverts accordingly. casualdejekyll (talk) 19:36, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

(note: I put this under a section for readability)

STOP POSTING ABOUT AMONG US!
My friends on Twitter send me memes, my friends on Discord send me memes, it's all AMONG US!!!!!

In all seriousness, mentions about Tanhony's amogus SCPs (the short stories SCP-5167 and SCP-5761, for those unaware of the SCP Foundation) should not be added to the article until/unless there are actual reliable sources talking about it. (See these guidelines on determining whether or not something is a reliable source.) casualdejekyll (talk) 23:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

UPDATE 18/09/21: I sent a request for page protection, and User:El C has protected the page for three days and is essentially saying "figure it out yourself." So, let's figure it out ourselves. Let's get full consensus on whether or not SCP deserves to be mentioned in this article. Tagging, , , as people who have edited over this frequently other then myself - if I missed anyone, tag them - I'm also going to be leaving user talk page notices. See the above parts of this section for my opinion on the matter. which, in one word, is No. Or, in more then one word, is show examples of reliable sources (by Wikipedia's definition) that can be added to the article that show that the SCP Foundation mention is notable. casualdejekyll (talk) 16:10, 18 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Coming here because notice at Talk:SCP_Foundation. First, this article needs WP:RS for the content, as written it can be deleted. On SCP, looking at this version, no, that is not good enough. We don't include pop-cult content based on the pop-cult itself. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:37, 18 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Here is one source to use in the article when possible. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:40, 18 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Personally, I agree with in that SCP Foundation entries about Among Us are not notable. Although these might be more well-known in the SCP or Among Us communities, they are not worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia. Roman Biggus (talk) 19:07, 18 September 2021 (UTC)


 * The SCP article about Phthonus is a pretty good SCP, but it almost definitely shouldn't be mentioned here. While my preferred solution is that its left out of the article since there isn't independent coverage, I would probably support a separate "in modern culture" section like we have for other old gods. Realistically, though, there aren't enough references to Phthonus to merit the inclusion of that section, so I don't think it should be mentioned. ThadeusOfNazerethTalk to Me! 20:11, 18 September 2021 (UTC)


 * I am the creator of the SCP Foundation article and have been maintaining it for over half a decade. Keeping this in mind, I think adding content about the SCP Foundation to this article is inappropriate. I'm opposed to "In Popular Culture" sections that do nothing but list every time something notable was referenced in a book, film, episode, etc; these listing violate WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Further, I've been unable to find any coverage in secondary sources so the only thing we have to cite is the SCP itself. Allowing the use of primary sources greatly increases the odds of an indiscriminate list and limits our ability to summarize what is most important. Finally, I'm a bit worried about due weight: if we add an SCP description to the article, then the article would be discussing the SCP Foundation and itself almost as much as it discussed the Greek god. This just seems rather inappropriate. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:30, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Right, the protection expires in 30 minutes and everyone here's saying No SCP. If anyone has any "Yes SCP" opinions, comment, but please back up your argument, thanks. casualdejekyll (talk) 15:28, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Its been around two days since your comment, and there have been no additional statements regarding the SCP issue. At this point, there's a clear, unanimous consensus against including references to the SCP Foundation in the article. A hidden statement should be added to the article noting this consensus. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 18:10, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Article Mention
As a followup to the previous post, the shortness of this Wikipedia article was mentioned on a fairly large YouTube channel earlier today. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RvPeA8AmuU at 6:43) It's possible that this page may see more activity from new users as a result. Mbrickn (talk) 03:31, 5 July 2022 (UTC)