Thank you! I'll definitely check them out as soon as I get to them. I'll leave comments when I read them! I might brave Chicken Chicken sooner rather than later to go ahead and get it over with. I remember it being cringe-worthy, haha.
Hey Todd. It's great to talk with you, and I'm excited for you to be on Goosebumps wiki. I was wondering, if you were interested, if you wanted to also contribute to my wiki on R.L Stine. It's like this one, except in addition to Goosebumps, it also covers all his other works as well, like fear street, the nightmare room, and more. Me and many other Goosebumps wiki members work on it, so would you be interested in joining?
Hi. I noticed you had some trouble editing a page's infobox. I "fixed" anything that seemed wrong to me. By that I mean that I added a link and made the mom's name go on a separate line. Now you can just edit the infobox without changing anything, to see how I did it. If you have any further questions I'll be happy to help, however I will need to sleep in about an hour, so apologies if I don't reply soon enough.
I didn't want to start another thread, so I'll just post my message here. I noticed that you uploaded images onto the pages you created, however many have logos and/or other characters fully featured in them. I uploaded cropped versions of some for you. I'm not sure if you don't know how to crop, but I just use https://www.befunky.com/create/ to crop my images. It's free and (I've found) it's the easiest website to use. Hope this helps!
I can crop with Adobe Photoshop. I thought about cropping the picture of Mark, but didn't want it to be a smaller width than the infobox. I was hoping someone knew of a better picture of Mark all around.
Okay! You probably know way more than I do. XD Usually I search online for images and most of the time they're pretty plentiful. However in some instances that's not the case. Luckily I have Netflix to screenshot images from an episode when I need them.
So, I’m an English major. I intend to teach middle School English. I analyze literature regularly leisurely, at school, and professionally. I look for literary elements naturally when I read.
As much as I love Goosebumps, I recognize they are flawed (some heavily-flawed); those entries in the series that aren’t flawed surprise me in a good way. Because of this, I don’t want to compare Goosebumps or hold Goosebumps to the same standards I do other books, because it would ruin my enjoyment of them.
I hope that makes sense and doesn’t seem like I’m being overly critical of the series. Like I said, I love this series. Troy Steele at Blogger Beware heavily criticized the books because he held them to the same standards as other books. I recognize my love for this series is fueled by nostalgia and I’m going into the series again knowing and accepting from the beginning that they are flawed. That’s the difference, and it’s why I wrote that rule for myself.
Hey dude, thanks for the edits on the Jonathan Chiller page. I think you were right in reverting my edits, I just thought 'a big old man' sounded a little vague, and in England we also use commas in lists to seperate the adjectives. Thanks. Cackles21 (talk) 20:01, August 5, 2018 (UTC)
Hey. I'm not sure what commas you are referring to, but we do that in the States sometimes, too, like, "his ugly, rotten tooth." One isn't needed between big and old in "big old man," though. I'm not sure why that is. I guess "big old man" is just a cliche phrase or description we all have heard.
The reason I reversed your edits wasn't because you removed the word "big," but because your edit created a new grammar mistake.
"He wears old-fashioned square glasses (the glasses for some reason were absent when Jonathan was seen on the cover of The Horror at Chiller House), as well as having a gold tooth."
That latter bit just sounded awkward, and I went to correct it and make that part its own sentence, but then I noticed that it was already its own sentence before you edited it and you moved the sentence. I didn't know if you thought "big old man" was bad grammar, either. It was just easier to undo the edit.
You were right to split the run-on sentence, though, so I did fix that back and credited you.
I hope I didn't offend you! If Jonathan Chiller is not described in the book as big, feel free to remove that again. I'm not super familiar with the book or character (haven't made it that far yet), but from your edit notes, you were correcting grammar, not content issues, so I thought maybe you thought "big old man" was incorrect grammar, which it is not.
Yeah, sorry. I just thought "big old man" wasn't the most clear sentence, sounding a bit strange. I think Jonathan Chiller did have a pot belly but wasn't particularly large otherwise, not even that tall. I'm very sorry, you're probably older and know more than me. Bye.
You should edit the page and go into more detail about his appearance like you did here if you feel stongly enough. Your description on my wall is much better than "big old man." Look, I simply reverted your edit because you said you were correcting grammar and there was nothing wrong with the grammar you edited, and there were grammar issues in your edit. I honestly believed you thought "big old man" was bad grammar. You didn't delete "big" and replace it with more accurate info (like the info you wrote on my wall here). I'm not an admin here, so this is purely advice and not instruction: If you think a sentence isn't clear, replace it with something more clear rather than deleting it. Someone thought it was important enough to add.
No need to apologize, and I don't know more than you. I clearly stated I am not familiar with the character or book and just wanted to help. You obviously do know about the character, so you know more than me in this case.
I hope you are not offended. All of us have our edits corrected. I added something to Night of the Living Dummy the other day that GbA removed because he didn't think it was exactly accurate. I didn't get offended because he explained why he edited my edit. Wikis are community projects worked on by a lot of people. I was honestly just trying to help you. :)
Evan is a normal boy. In fact, he is the normalest boy you could ever imagine. He likes being normal and doing normal things. His normality is a staple atrribute in his normal demeanor. #NormalHuman #JustLikeU
You just made me spit out the Diet Dr. Pepper I was drinking. lol
I'd be okay with it if Stine emphasized his normality in the books, but the statement is subjective at best and sterotyping at worst. Whoever wrote that originally went to town with it and listed things boys should like. I think Andy might fit the stereotype of a normal boy more than Evan. ;)
>It's been a while since I read this book, so someone check behind me, but trying to be more specific than "one of the main characters.
I don't know if "secondary protagonist" is really a title. Which is why I never liked using it on articles. We could technically say "deuteragonist", but I feel like using obscure words is unfair to the readers. That's why I simply say "main character" when referring to characters like Alex.
Ah, gotcha. "One of the main characters" definitely works for characters like Alex in that case. So for a standard book you'll basically have a protagonist, other main characters, and supporting characters on the "good" side and "antagonists on the "bad" side?
I was surfing through the character pages, and the roles were all over the place. We had protagonists, main protagonists, main heroes, secondary protagonists, supporting characters, and "one of the main characters."
Mark from The Scarecrow Walks At Midnight is categorized both as a Protagonist and as a Supporting Character. I think these characters who are second in importance or activity after the protagonist are causing a lot of confusion.
If you don't use deuteragonist or secondary protagonist, there is just one protagonist per book. Even though characters like Mark, Fergie, and Lefty are important to the books, I think they are all supporting characters if there is no middle role, since they are not the one protagonist. Books that have two protagonists are generally romances, where both main characters are equally important.
Oh, I've never read HorrorLand. I just now noticed and was looking at the Appearances section and was about to post on your wall about this. The Billy page only covers the Deep Trouble books and lists him as the protagonist of just three books. That's where I was looking. Maybe we should tag his page as "Pages needing attention" and try to push for some information on him from the other books he appears.
> In order to standardize things, we should try to limit it to
A main character
I like this a lot. I also think the Supporting Character category is subjective. I'm in favor of moving characters like Mark out of the protagonists category and getting rid of the Supporting Character category altogether because it does confuse people. "Supporting Character" can have two meanings, really: 1) "minor characters" and 2) any character other than the protagonist or antagonist(s). Did someone make a special case for having that category?
>I could be mistaken, but were you the one to suggest that category?
Nope. I looked back on your wall to see if I had said anything that made you think that (wasn't hard because I've only been here since last December), and found a categories rant I made (if you look on your wall, go 7 pages back). It seems like "Supporting Character" used to be called "Secondary Protagonist." I don't remember those details now. I've even been writing "secondary protagonist" on some of my pages, lol. Shows how bad my memory is. Anyway, back then, I said:
Previously, "secondary protagonists" was a category for the "next most important" character after the protagonist. Fergie, Mark, Elliot, Andy. I didn't like the name, but used it because that's what the community had been using. I agree with the name change to "supporting characters," but I wish it had a restriction set like, only "next most important" characters or something. The problem is every character that is not the protagonist is a "supporting character." Why have a category at all?
You replied and said:
Maybe we should implement a "Minor characters" category. Then we could add a description to that category that says a character is either secondary or minor (or neither).
So nope, wasn't me. I've always said if there's no distinction between secondary and everyone else, we don't need the category at all (cause anyone who is not a protagonist or antagonist now falls in it). But! Did discussion move past this point for "Minor characters?" If readers/editors want a distinction between characters like Mark and Fergie and minor characters like Mom and Dad Alicia from Camp Jellyjam, that might be a good way to do it.
Hey, so I always write short stories and I've even written a few books, and what u ppsted in the comments sparked an entire plot in my mind, so do u mind if I use it? I wont use all the stuff u wrote, but definately some...is it ok with u?