Talk:Legion (demon) in popular culture
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Popular Culture, a WikiProject which aims to improve all articles related to popular culture. |
|
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Low | This article is on a subject of low-importance within popular culture articles. | |
|
This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
||
Contents |
[edit] The Ghost Rider Quote
Did the demon guy say "We are Legion, for I am many" ? I'm quite sure that is what he said... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.232.2.70 (talk) 16:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Legion isn't in Storm of the Century
Wouldn't Legion have said: "Give us what we want and we'll go away"? The only reference to Legion is in the blocks, which doesn't necessary mean that Linoge was Legion. Perhaps it was only a reference to how he would drive the citizens into the sea like the pigs of Galilee? He never makes mention of Legion's multiplicity.
-- edit --
That is not entirely accurate. The legend is explicitly discussed in the film/book as well. ArcAngelMD 00:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)ArcAngelMD
[edit] Merge
Everything in this page should just be moved to the Legion (demon) page, as it just discusses the exact same subject. Roy Brumback 09:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
If I may say so, this is a disambiguation page, not a separate article. While most references are, as you stated, listed on Legion, someone researching that quote and perhaps unfamiliar with its origin might find disambiguation pages like this to be helpfull. I'm against the notion of a merge. Ipso-De-Facto 01:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Comment
How about mentioning hte whole issue with 4chan and their whole we are anonymous we are legion stuff?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chanology —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.82.50.2 (talk) 02:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
The reference to Anonymous is crap. And excuse my language, but I couldn't find a better term. Anonymous has stated clearly over time: they are NOT a group of hackers, or a group at all. You're making it sound like an organization. You're in an ecyclopedia, check your sources. FoxNews and CNN are NOT serious sources when it comes to internet phenomena.
"It has come to the attention of Anonymous that there are a number of you out there who do not clearly understand what we are or why we have undertaken our present course of action. Contrary to the assumptions of the media, Anonymous is not "a group of super hackers". Anonymous is a collective of individuals united by an awareness that someone must do the right thing, that someone must bring light to the darkness, that someone must open the eyes of a public that has slumbered for far too long. Among our numbers you will find individuals from all walks of life - lawyers, parents, IT professionals, members of law enforcement, college students, veterinary technicians and more. Anonymous is everyone and everywhere. We have no leaders, no single entity directing us - only the collective outrage of individuals, guiding our hand in the current efforts to bring awareness."
THAT is the most accurate definition of Anonymous. You can't make a better one. You don't understand it. So STOP TRYING. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.15.197.80 (talk) 08:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- You are correct that they are not an organization per se but they are definitely a collective group of individuals and as it is part of their motto/creed it should be mentioned. --150.131.128.152 (talk) 19:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I think it's debatable whether Anonymous derived their motto from the demon Legion, it's as likely to be an attempt to draw forth the image of an unstoppable military juggernaut. Since the group certainly can't offer a cohesive definition themselves and there is no source given, I feel the statement should be amended to state it is a possible source for the tagline. 68.94.233.32 (talk) 05:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
