This   level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Folklore Mid‑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.FolkloreWikipedia:WikiProject FolkloreTemplate:WikiProject FolkloreFolklore articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Literature High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

A very good article.Guilfred John Ganotisi Tuazon is handsome Especially the comparisment with mythology. -- Fred- Chess 19:20, 10 May 2005 (UTC) reply

Is there a topic on Wikipedia for the type of legend that is on a map, for what all of the symbols represent. I was just hoping to get a better description for a map legend.

Is there a topic on Wikipedia for the type of legend that is on a map, for what all of the symbols represent. I was just hoping to get a better description for a map legend....

The word "Widge" redirects to this page, however there is no reason why and it does not appear anywhere in the article. -- 71.17.149.242 ( talk) 01:38, 27 February 2008 (UTC) reply

"Most important of all are the Three Legends. Hailing from Risca, the trio are the stuff of many tales of folklore and superstition in the area."

This sounds dubious. Does anyone have a reference? Tom harrison 22:40, 10 October 2005 (UTC) reply

I took this out since nobody spoke up. Tom Harrison (talk) 21:17, 29 October 2005 (UTC) reply

From the moment a legend is retailed as a legend, its authentic legendary qualities begin to fade and recede: in The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, Washington Irving transformed a local Hudson River Valley legend into a sly literary anecdote with "Gothic" overtones, which actually tended to diminish its character as genuine legend.

I think 'retailed' is meant in a sense like 'commercially exploited.' Tom Harrison (talk) 21:21, 29 October 2005 (UTC) reply

Small problem in an otherwise handy article, Before the invention of the printing press, stories were passed on via oral tradition. What of hand written Books and scrolls?

The main trouble here is that Irving's story is not based on local tradition. There was no Galloping Hessian in Sleepy Hollow before he put one there. His inspiration was probably in stories he heard in Germany on a recent visit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.49.21.6 ( talk) 21:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC) reply

• First Comment: In "The Concise Oxford Dictionary" (Seventh edition, 1982) sense 2 of the verb "retail" is defined as "recount, relate details of". I think that what the editor meant was that once a legend is self-consciously presented as a legend it begins to lose its legendary quality. To retain that, it would have to be presented as if it were fact. • Second Comment: Of course, you're right that before the printing press legends were often recorded in manuscripts, not only in oral traditions. O Murr ( talk) 19:11, 24 November 2019 (UTC) reply

"Storytellers learned their stock in trade: their stories, typically from an older storyteller, who might, though more likely not, have actually witnessed the "story" was "history"."

This sentence doesn't make any sense. At the same time, I am loath to change it because I don't know what the original author meant to say. Anyone? (anon.)

self-indulgent babble. pay no heed. -- Wetman 04:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC) reply

The following story was removed from the Wiki page, because after a reasonable amount of time doing searches on Google, none of the "truthes" in this story could be found, either by name, similar name, dynasty, or length of rule online. If someone could cite where this story was found, please do so, and then tell me so I can read it to my family!

Emperor Chianlong in Ching Dynasty is one of good examples of legends. The period of his rule is the longest in the history; it lasted about sixty years. During the six decades, China was in a peak that other countries sent their envoys to China wanting to learn something through the interaction. It is said that Chianlong had many talents, such as writing beautiful articles and poems and knowing about kungfu. In the history, there are many interesting stories about him. The most popular ones are his interaction with his beloved ministers. During his rule, Chianlong not only extended the territory, but also attached great importance to culture. People regard him as a sage emperor so they write many stories about him. Some of them are not so factual, but most of them are worth trusting and have historical supports. It is the typical example of legends. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guppywon ( talk • contribs) 15:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC) reply

It seems extraordinarily difficult for average people to keep these separate, though the articles appear to hammer home their logical, consistent distinctions quite clearly, with quotes, references, examples. I removed an illustration of magical ghost-foxes of Japanese folklore called Kitsune: does anyone not see why? A casual passer-by removed the disambiguating explanations from the following:

• Odysseus, for those convinced that a historical Odysseus existed and seek to locate his Ithaca.
• Beowulf, for those convinced that a historical Beowulf existed, his supposed Burial mound has yet to be excavated.

Does anyone not see why I returned the phrases to the names? They explain under precisely what circumstances these figures, ordinarily considered mythical, would be figures of legend for someone. Somebody else has dotted the article with citation demands like crumbs on a tablecloth. Is this all so terribly difficult? It's sixth-grade material as I recall. -- Wetman ( talk) 07:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC) reply

== Some legend is non-fiction and some of them is fiction.legend is a story ehere we express our fellings,beliefs,culture and etc. ==

Why have Romulus and Remus, a Roman legnd (or is it a myth?) been placed on the same line as Romani legend? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.162.215 ( talk) 21:19, 17 January 2010 (UTC) reply

"Vandal Mckenna born in the late 16th century...." This section seems to relate a legend, but is unrelated to the paragraph in which it appears (which deals with "The Golden Legend"). No attribution given. Ought this be removed? 72.49.43.222 ( talk) 17:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi. Your input might be useful in our discussion at Talk:Legendary#Requested move. Thanks. :) -- Quiddity ( talk) 03:22, 13 October 2010 (UTC) reply

YOUR BELEIFS ON LEGENDS HAS ME IN A FLABERGASTED STATE OF MIND BECAUSE U ARE PROBABLY THE MOST ILITERATE PERSON IN THE WORLD IF ANYONE THINKS LEGENDS ARE ABOUT MYTHS AND FOLKLORE I BELEIVE THERE is a world of possibilities in the world for anyone who wants to learn about a legend and honestly i dont think you or any of these people beleive in legends and if you dont beleive in them how can u understand them and what they mean. i classify a legend as a mythical story not just a fantazized folktale wich if that was the case you truly are in a legend because you have gone insane and should be put in a mental health institution —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.254.72.114 ( talk) 12:57, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

After looking through the page history of this article, it seems to me that the bulk of edits to this page consist of vandalism/unconstructive edits and subsequent reversal. Maybe it is a good idea to semi-protect this article? Lindert ( talk) 21:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC) reply

Will-Earl Peukert - could it be Will-Earl Peuckert? There is a German Wiki page on Peuckert. Unable to verify the reference with Peukert as the last name. I think I have figured out how to let people know that there is a German page, if I am correct. I am new and don't want to just change it. Please respond. Acuteidea ( talk) 23:50, 10 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Fixed. Belatedly. But it's Erich, not Earl.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 17:58, 30 December 2015 (UTC) reply

'Legend' can also be used in the UK for some one who you think is cool and it's very well heard of now. I think this should be included

Hello, I'm working with OCLC, and we are algorithmically generating data about different Genres, like notable Authors, Book, Movies, Subjects, Characters and Places. We have determined that this Wikipedia page has a close affintity to our detected Genere of legends. It might be useful to look at [1] for more information. Thanks. Maximilianklein ( talk) 23:35, 5 December 2012 (UTC) reply

The article is anglo-centric, esp. with notions how "legend" appeared in English language. That is particular strange as it is a latin phrase, and literary discourse was Latin and pan-european -- Arebenti ( talk) 15:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC) reply

You must be kidding, of course the article is 'anglo-centric' it's the "English" version of the article. I assume the Italian version tracks the development of the Italian word from Latin too. Don't be silly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.88.94.122 ( talk) 20:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Feel free to comment at Talk:Legend (disambiguation)#Merger proposal.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:43, 17 August 2014 (UTC) reply

On the Atlantis page there has just been an RfC which concluded that Atlantis was not a legend!-- Jack Upland ( talk) 17:53, 30 December 2015 (UTC) reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Standing tall- Lapu Lapu (9234954797).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 20:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply

The pic of Lady Godiva is described as being presented in "an anachronistic high medieval setting". But the high medieval period is generally thought to be from 1000 to 1300, which would encompass the time when Lady Godiva was alive, and is therefore not anachronistic. But to my (admittedly untrained) eye, the picture does indeed seem anachronistic, as it has architecture from the late medieval or even Tudor period (ie 1500 or later). So I suggest altering the phrase "high medieval" to "late medieval". Brooklyn Eagle ( talk) 01:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply