Talk:Childlore

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Children's literature Top‑importance Children's literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature 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. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Tasks you can do: edit history watch purge Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks. Add {{Portal|Children's literature}} to the See also section of related articles. Tag the talk pages of related articles with {{WikiProject Children's literature}} Join WikiProject Children's literature and list yourself as a Participant in the project. Cleanup: A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects. Deletion discussions: listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability Rate the Unassessed articles in the Children's literature WikiProject. References: Add references to Unreferenced BLPs. Requested articles: Create a requested article on literature Stubs: Improve a stub-class article edit Games (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Games, a project which is currently considered to be inactive. Folklore Top‑importance This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Folklore, a WikiProject dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the topics of folklore and folklore studies. If you would like to participate, you may edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project's page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to discussion. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Sociology Top‑importance Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Anthropology: Oral tradition Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce (assessed as Top-importance).

Comment

"Opie and Opie demonstrate that the culture of children is quite distinctive and is as unnoticed by the sophisticated world, and quite as little affected by it, as is the culture of some dwindling aboriginal tribe living out its helpless existence in the hinterland of a native reserve." -- Referring to aboriginals as having a "helpless existence" is very editorial (and rather racist). If it is, as I'm assuming, a direct quote from the source, it should be called out as a quote, not stated inline as a fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.255.1.195 (talk) 09:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Unfortunately, although I have the Opie's books, I do not have the Grider, so this may take some time for me to track down the quote.--SabreBD (talk) 10:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Nearly every culture throughout the world has nursery rhymes." Does anybody know which cultures do not have nursery rhymes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.96.223.116 (talk) 14:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further reading

Franklin, Rosalind (2005). Baby Lore: Superstitions & Old Wives Tales From The World Over Related to Pregnancy, Birth & Babycare. Diggory Press, United Kingdom. ISBN 0-9515655-4-0.

This source seems to have little to do with children's folklore, so I'm removing it from the Further reading section. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 12:42, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Narrow Focus

This article seems problematic; the intro names several different topics within the field of child lore yet the only one that the article discusses is nursery rhymes. This article just reads like a report on nursery rhymes; can we fix this? Maybe add sections on playground games, modern adaptions of nursery rhymes, and activities like the “Cheese Touch” which I’m sure is a category with an actual name, I just don’t know the term for it. Spicybeans420 (talk) 09:47, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed in 2025. I can't help this article, but as it stands, it pukes some information about nursery rhymes. These already have their own page/section, and are reasonably distinct (though not mutually exclusive) from childlore as a consideration, often composed by adults. Examples of culture passed from child to child are lacking. I can see that this article's had a messy history, and I respect the cleanup described below, but we may need a reboot. See Also shows some great examples that could do with a collective group header page. 78.40.233.11 (talk) 12:16, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I've taken a stab at giving the article a comprehensive rewrite, aiming for a broader focus with clearly defined sections. While there's still more work to be done, I hope this outline provides a solid foundation for future editors to build upon and push the article toward FA standards. Feedback and further improvements are welcome!

Cheers ForayHistory (talk) 14:30, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AI "writing": somebody ought to be ashamed of themselves!

I have just done a major cleanup of the Nursery Rhymes section, which I would bet real money was "written" by an AI. It was just as stilted, formulaic, and robotic as every other piece of slop generated by the likes of ChatGPT. Whoever did that, shame on you. That's not what Wikipedia is supposed to be. Also, ref names are not supposed to be numerals, they're supposed to be names relevant to the ref, so future editors can readily use them. 2001:569:7EEA:AE00:58B2:6598:F692:61AD (talk) 23:15, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This +36k June 2025 edit by User:ForayHistory which they describe in the previous section as "a stab at giving the article a comprehensive rewrite" also has some AI stylings to it. The addition introduced a lot of broken references which other editors tidied up manually, marking some as "page needed".

A spot check of a checkable reference isn't great: In Singapore, kampong games like "five stones" use pebbles to develop dexterity, reflecting resourcefulness in post-war communities. is sourced to [1] and [2], but the second mentions only "simple kampung living", and neither mentions any kind of pebble game.

The user who added it has an unanswered question about LLM use on their talk page, but it looks like they've also been working on this content manually. Could you clarify how this content was written, ForayHistory? Belbury (talk) 10:56, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Equitable Futures - Internet Cultures and Open Access

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 January 2025 and 16 May 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sofiamiller14 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Delephia.

— Assignment last updated by WikiEdit7205 (talk) 15:37, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]