Talk:Great Old One

Horror Low‑importance

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fictional characters

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Azathoth

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)[reply]

Requested move

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)[reply]

Moving Great Old One to Great Old Ones was ill-conceived. Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Prefer singular nouns clearly applies to this case; and there seems to be no good reason for making an exception. Once the move is effected, rephrasing the introductory sentence using the singular should alleviate any future concerns about this matter. RlyehRising 19:47, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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 Olds|Great Old One]]
The opposite (plural linking to the singular) is much easier to deal with, i.e.:
[[Great Old One]]s
(In fact, this is probably why Wikipedia prefers singular nouns in the first place.)
RlyehRising 04:18, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Great Old Ones in Doctor Who novels

As mentioned on References to the Cthulhu mythos, some of the Doctor Who novels from the 1990s identified various powerful entities from the original Doctor Who series with various Great Old Ones — for example, Hastur was Fenric, the Nestene Consciousness (which powered the Autons) was one of the offspring of Shub-Niggurath, et cetera. I was going to add a short note about this to the article, but couldn't figure out where best to put it in the article's organization. Since the table includes things like the appearance of M'nagalah in Swamp Thing, should this just go into the table somehow? I don't really know much about Lovecraft scholarship, and don't know what the widely accepted view of canon (fiction) is.

I would have just put a note at the bottom, but there isn't a section, and it felt out of place with all the scholarly citations. —Josiah Rowe 16:35, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the issue of the Great Old One M'nagalah, I came across this on the net:

CTHULHU IN THE COMICS - Part One: The Superhero Books

The following instance of DC utilizing the Mythos was much more satisfying as a whole, and occurred in a much more fitting place: a monster-hero comic! SWAMP THING # 8 featured "The Lurker in Tunnel 13!", written by Len Wein and drawn by the incomparable Bernie Wrightson, and introducing the very Lovecraftian Old One, M'nagalah. You may recognize the name, for no less an author than Ramsey Campbell picked up the tentacled amorphous monster for inclusion in his intriguing Revelations of Glaaki, as evidenced by a passage in his story, "The Tugging"! And the team of Wein and Wrightson must be congratulated on this story, for "Lurker" manages to convey a mood and careful attention to detail seldom exhibited in such four-color efforts at Mythos story-telling!
—James Ambuehl, Boyd E. Pearson and Dan Ross, "I. The DC Comics Company"

In "The Tugging", Campbell describes M'nagalah this way: "a tentacled mass of what looked like bloated raw entrails and eyes..."

^Gate2Valusia^{Oh?..(contribs)} 03:51, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I've read (and even own) that issue of Swamp Thing — it's a good story. But I'm afraid it doesn't help me with my question about how best to incorporate the Doctor Who info... :) —Josiah Rowe 04:46, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend adding a ==Great Old Ones in other media== section before the ==References== section. It might look something like this:

==Great Old Ones in other media==

* Blah..blah..[[Doctor Who]]..blah..blah.

It would also be a good idea to include a reference for this info under the ===Books=== or ===Web sites=== section in References (you probably already know this stuff, but it may still be of use to others). Information for citing sources is found here (which, admittedly, I don't religiously adhere to). You might consider using Wiki's reference templates. For example, a simple web reference template looks like this:

{{Web reference_simple | title=Title | URL=http://www.example.com | date=Month Day | year=Year}}

^Gate2Valusia^{Oh?..(contribs)} 02:33, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gol-goroth

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.^[1]

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."^[2]

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".^[3]

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).

¹ Robert E. Howard, "The Gods of Bal-Sagoth", The Dark Man and Others, pp. 104. New York, NY: Lancer Books, 1963.
² C. J. Henderson, "Free the Old Ones", Made In Goatswood, pp. 194. Scott David Aniolowski (ed). Oakland, CA: Chaosium, 1995. ISBN 1-56882-046-1.
³ Lin Carter, "The Fishers from Outside", The New Lovecraft Circle, pp. 90. Robert M. Price (ed.), New York, NY: Random House, 1996. ISBN 0-345-44406-X.

RlyehRising 19:57, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ammutseba

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) Link doesn't work. Care to provide a backup, or another source?--Phngluimlgwnafh95 (talk) 04:46, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tarapithia

Link to an online source on Tarapithia: [[1]]

[[2]]

FINALY found a story with Tarapithia-though its an onine story,it could count.Its on more then one page too: [[3]]

[[4]]

New Babylon 2 17:44, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

X'chll'at-aa

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)[reply]

broken table

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)[reply]

Sheogorath

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)[reply]

I looked it up on uesp.net and they mention the developer but not shoggoths. Also there is no reference to the statement and I'm fairly sure you are not supposed add anything to the wikipedia without one (whether or not it's true).67.71.16.118 (talk) 21:20, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to go ahead and remove the part on Sheogorath, seeing as how no one has objected to it in my earlier statments. Were they simply missed and someone does indeed take issue than I sencerly appologise. Oh, and I also have my doubts about the validity of the statement on Mehrunes Dagon as I believe Dagon was mentioned in the Bible (albeit not the same character but the name) before he was in lovecraft.67.71.16.164 (talk) 21:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, is it just noone noticed or no one cared that I removed the piont because I don't want someone to notice in a month and think it was vandilism. 69.158.144.135 (talk) 20:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POV

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)[reply]

Seriously? Great Old cults only appear in fiction. One could argue Scientology is fictonal beliefs, but REAL people follow them. Show me one person who truly follows the Great Old Ones... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.202.219.38 (talk) 00:02, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Totorotroll (talk) 10:05, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Basatan : Master of the Crabs

Description: "Presumably a gigantic crab.".. nice phrasing :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lessthanideal (talk • contribs) 22:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

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)[reply]

More than month passed, no objection. Well, pretty much everything notable is already in Cthulhu Mythos in popular culture. L-Zwei (talk) 04:37, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]