There is a move discussion at Talk:Freaks#Requested move 12 May 2019 proposing that there is no primary topic for the plural which is currently about a film. Cr
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Freak article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
| This article was nominated for deletion on 8 January 2018. The result of the discussion was keep. |
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
There is a move discussion at Talk:Freaks#Requested move 12 May 2019 proposing that there is no primary topic for the plural which is currently about a film. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:45, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
@GenQuest: I added "monster" to the "See also" list and was reverted with a vague summary "not needed". I think the cultural concepts of freaks and monsters are closely related and often overlap, and there is value in linking one to the other. Arguments to the contrary? —swpbT • go beyond • bad idea 13:39, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Should this entry not say that it was a term used historically to refer to these individuals, rather than it simply being what they are?
I notice that the entry is locked from being edited. 220.235.255.175 (talk) 08:56, 11 April 2025 (UTC)
I'm wondering if we might want to add "complex and sometimes controversial" as a qualifier in the first sentence, as otherwise, it seems to almost imply that this is the proper term. ~2026-25865-19 (talk) 19:00, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.