Talk:Folk devil

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Politics

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Psychology

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology 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.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Sociology

	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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Folklore

	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.FolkloreWikipedia:WikiProject FolkloreTemplate:WikiProject FolkloreFolklore articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Folk devil be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Comments

On 22nd January I wrote a piece on 'Folk devils'. I was trying to help and to put a useful text where there was none. Somebody called, 'Ihcoyc' deleted my whole text and put his/her own there instead. 'Ihcoyc' made a good contribution. It was better than mine. Despite this I would like to ask, 'Why did 'Ihcoyc' deleat my whole work?' I've restored the greater part of my text and added a bit to it. I think my text improves the article.

Barbara Shack.

Having read the before and after sections, I would say that your text wasn't exactly deleted. It was just rewritten to fit in with the style of the Wikipedia. This is normal behaviour for contributors to the Wikipedia and you should expect it unless you try to write in the Wikipedia style. You can find out how to do this by reading the tutorial articles on style.

Since you have now added your original text back in to the article, it is now repeating itself on some points and consequently you should expect that people will edit it to remove the repetition and to make it fit in with the Wikipedia style once more. Please don't worry about it. This happens to every one of us and it generally leads to better articles. The inportant thing is that your original facts remain. -- Derek Ross

The article seems to have become opinionated as this user has added more to it. It needs another major rewrite soon. Any volunteers? SimonMayer 17:37 Mon 26th October 2004 (UTC/GMT).

26 October ? I know that we all live in different time zones but that's taking it to extremes. Time to fix your computer clock I think. -- Derek Ross 17:41, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. It must be national pride, I consider my country nine months ahead of the others, but I'm pleased that you pay such close attention. SimonMayer 17:51 Mon 26th January 2004 (UTC/GMT).

As the guilty party who did the rewriting, I would say in my defence that it was a page that appeared on a page called Wikipedia:Cleanup, which seeks to call users' attention to pages that need work. I saw it there and took my cue from there, and attempted to rework it into something more stylistically consistent with other articles here.

I hope this experience has not soured you on Wikipedia generally; it is somewhat dismaying to see your own work being rewritten, I know. You may wish to sign up for an account and get a user name, do some more looking around, and try to improve the article yourself. I thank you for beginning it! -- Smerdis of Tlön 01:37, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The article seems to be quite substantial now, is the stub note really still warranted? -- Kizor 13:21, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Quote from article:

The concept of the folk devil was introduced by sociologist Stanley Cohen in 1972...

Can any sociologists confirm if the term is used in any other context at all? Both of the external links refer to it specifically as Cohen's invention, and all the other references I can find are quotes of this article. If the term was used only by Cohen, or even if it is used generally by sociologists but not elsewhere, the article should say so in the first paragraph. Securiger 09:09, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I've seen it elsewhere, particularly in books by the folklorist Bill Ellis. However, unlike moral panic, the concept of folk devil seems not to have penetrated much into the surrounding culture. I suspect it is used mostly by professional folklorists and sociologists. Smerdis of Tlön 15:11, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I thought a folk devil was something like the chupacabra or the Jersey devil. -Branddobbe 07:28, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

Refugees and Gypsies?

I'd like to add the current moral panics re:ayslum seekers and Roma in the UK to the list. I'm aware that this could be my POV so adding it here first. Secretlondon 02:36, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Adding them to the list sounds reasonable to me but if you're worried about POV issues, how about finding a citation to back it up ? -- Derek Ross | Talk 05:08, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Volksteufel?

There is no German word like "Volksteufel", appropriate terms for folk devil could perhaps be (in a sociological meaning) "Außenseiter" (outsider) or "Sündenbock" (scapegoat). Who put this very bad translation into the article? - Andreas 05:28, Sept 14, 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.233.218.135 (talk) 15:23, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed To Catch a Predator reference

I removed the To Catch a Predator reference, because it made no sense in the context of this subject. Folk devil refers to a group that is maligned as criminal, not an actual group of criminals. Snookumz (talk) 02:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--- I noticed the ending references to the Catholic Church, and frankly it sounded anti-Catholic, biased, and prejudiced. We could similarly present many more sources that argue the opposite: That the secularized media and opponents of the Church have tried to use the sex scandal as a means to vilify the Church and turn it into a "folk devil". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.142.50 (talk) 11:49, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pedophiles and child molesters (or sexual predators, which is a more general term: predators do not necessarily target children) are never distinguished from each other in popular use, but they are not the same group (even though there is considerable overlap, of course). Pedophiles are a group that is collectively maligned as criminal, although not all of them are criminal (contrary to what Snookum states), therefore they fit the definition. The removal of this example from the article was totally unjustified. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:03, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]