Talk:Hyakki Yagyō

In popular culture

• In the Ghibli movie Pom Poko, Operation Spectre/Operation Poltergeist was intended to evoke the Hyakki Yakō.
• In the manga Nurarihyon no Mago, the main character seeks to gather his own Hyakki Yako.
• It appears in a chapter of the CLAMP manga xxxHolic.
• The Hyakki Yakō is referred to on a number of occasions in lyrics by rock band Kagrra,.

I'm moving this section here until some fanboy editor can find references to help improve this. Cheers! Duende-Poetry (talk) 13:15, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

And Once Again

One must ask, this arbitrary use of Popular Culture which, after an editor removes 75% of, are we any poorer as an encyclopedia because of its removal? We're still left with a list of unreferenced anime and video games. Why do we indulge those who are incapable of academic research with a place on this website? All it does is make more work for those of us who actually care that Wiki be considered anything more than a joke Duende-Poetry (talk) 16:34, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Pop Culture Trivia Will Be Removed

Because it seems to happen very often, I'm just leaving this here to ask people not to add trivial bits of information such as "a hyakki yagyō appears in such-and-such episode of such-and-such anime." That information does nothing to improve the article. If you think it is important to link the two, then the appropriate place would be to reference this page (Hyakki Yagyō) from that particular anime's page. Not vice versa. Osarusan (talk) 19:19, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Removing Pop Culture Trivia Again

I'm moving the pop culture trivia section here again, rather than deleting it outright, just in case someone feels it needs to be looked at more closely.

Please stop adding lists of trivial pop culture (read [Wikipedia:"In_popular_culture"_content]. It may take some work, but find a way to incorporate valuable data into a meaningful section, rather than just listing every instance of hyakki yagyo in your favorite animes. Any additions that don't fit the requirements in the pop culture article will be undone. Osarusan (talk) 14:44, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

• The Hyakki Yagyō has appeared several times in modern fiction and film. It has been featured in Japanese manga, animation, and games.
• The manga Nurarihyon no Mago, has Rikuo Nura, the Third Head of the Nura Clan, leading a Hyakki Yakō, a group of yokai composed of his friends and allies.
• In the Ghibli movie Pom Poko, "Operation Poltergeist" resembles a Hyakki Yagyō.
• The children's game Hyakumonogatari Kaidankai, a popular didactic Buddhist-inspired parlour game, was based on this idea.
• The Night Parade, a 2016 middle-grade fantasy novel by Kathryn Tanquary, features Hyakki Yagyō or Night Parade, as the title suggests.

References

Nonsense

How about instead of obsessing over scrubbing away all references to pop-culture, y'all figure out what the hell "nights associated with the Chinese zodiac" is supposed to mean, 'cuz in all my research, that's complete gobbledegook. 82.29.160.67 (talk) 21:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree. "Wikipedia is not paper" and "in popular culture" sections are an interesting part of many articles. AdamFunk (talk) 15:54, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Pop culture useful for once?

Normally I'd agree that the pop culture section hanging off the bottoms of so many Wikipedia articles like a data winnit is not only useless, but worse than useless, because if this kind of obsessive-compulsive trivia is deemed to be a valid part of so many articles, the sort of people who think cracked.com is an encyclopedia 'cos it's got lots of words arranged into lists of stuff could be forgiven for thinking that this is the standard Wikipedia aspires to, and no part of any article needs to be any better.

And obviously when you're talking about Japanese folklore, if you permitted the inclusion of every passing mention of any of these creatures in any mass-produced Japanese cartoon or crappy pop song, this article would be several thousand pages long, and of no possible use or interest to anyone except Rain Man.

But actually for once I came to it looking for a pop culture reference. Round about 1960 somebody made at least two, and I think a trilogy of live-action movies about this very subject, but I don't speak Japanese so I forget the titles of these films and the names of everyone involved, and I was hoping this article would help me out, because that's what encyclopedias are supposed to be for, isn't it?

I think the problem may be that when it comes to "In popular culture" you're setting the bar so low it's not so much a matter of clearing it as digging a deep hole to see if there is one, so the useful information gets lost under a mountain of dross. For example, the 1941 Lon Chaney film "The Wolf Man" would certainly qualify as "popular culture" by most definitions, but it's highly relevant to any encyclopedic discussion of werewolves because a great deal of what the average person assumes to be traditional werewolf folklore was invented by the screenwriter Curt Siodmak for that movie. And it would be hard to talk about either folkloric Eastern European vampires or the real medieval warlord Vlad Dracula without mentioning Bram Stoker, who almost entirely reinvented both of them in 1897.

It only becomes a problem when you start letting the Aspergers casualties add endless lists of every passing mention of werewolves or vampires in anything. We don't need know that in episode 387 of "Toenail Ninja Shoji" there was a vampire space lobster who had a pet werechihuahua, and somebody interested in the historical importance of Sir Walter Raleigh probably wouldn't find it very useful to be told that the Beatles' song "I'm So Tired" refers to him as "such a stupid get". (I've just checked, and to my amazement your page on Sir Walter Raleigh doesn't include that moronic factoid. Well done! You're improving!)

Have you considered dispensing entirely with the "In popular culture" section and instead including pop culture references that actually matter in the appropriate section of the main article? That way, contributors intelligent enough to reach something approximating the standard a real encyclopedia would require will include that material because they have the brainpower to figure out what belongs and where it should go, and nobody will get the idea that the funny wee paragraph at the bottom is a sandbox where small children and idiots are welcome to add any old drivel and pretend they're doing encyclopedia. 81.147.130.99 (talk) 09:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)