Wikipedia:WikiProject Popular culture

For information on "In popular culture" sections of articles, see Wikipedia:"In popular culture" content

WikiProject Popular culture

Shortcut	WP:WPPC
Categories	Topics in popular culture, WikiProject Popular culture
Wikimedia Commons	Popular culture
Project banner template	{{WikiProject Popular culture}}
Userbox	{{User WPPC}}
Has goals?	Yes
Assessment	Wikipedia:WikiProject Popular culture/Assessment
Popular pages	Wikipedia:WikiProject Popular culture/Popular pages

WikiProject Popular culture aims to preserve "In popular culture" and "Trivia"-type information in Wikipedia in a manner that does not compromise Wikipedia's core principles or its quality.

Principles

• Information is information. "Trivia", "In popular culture", and similar sections are often excised from Wikipedia. "In popular culture" articles were, at one time, deleted even more routinely. We feel this is a case of a vocal minority overriding the interests of a scattered majority. The prevalence of such sections demonstrates a broad interest in having such information on Wikipedia.
• Every article its reader. The principles we embrace match those of the five laws of library science – in particular, "for every reader, his or her book" and "for every book, its reader". Given that Wikipedia is not paper, there is no justification for deleting speciality-interest information from the encyclopedia because a subset of our readers do not share those interests.
• We uphold Wikipedia's core content policies. All material in Wikipedia, "trivial" or not, must be verifiable, neutral, and well-organized. Note that there is no overarching policy on how Wikipedia must be organized -- this is an organic principle, brought about by the collective effort of many thousands of Wikipedia editors.

Goals

We seek to:

• Preserve compliant content. If material is verifiable, neutral, and well-organized, we feel deleting it is an inappropriate act -- an expression of personal distaste not in keeping with the goal of creating the world's best encyclopedia.
• Make articles more compliant with core content policies. If we come across information that is unlikely to be verifiable, we shall delete it. If we see a fact could be moved to a more relevant section of an article (or a more relevant article), we will integrate it. If we come across a large and disorganized "In popular culture" list, we will sort and subcategorize its entries and take other steps to improve its presentation. If we can find sources for any trivia or pop-culture information (including primary sources, with some restrictions), we will add a citation to it. Work of this sort can also be done via a related project, WikiProject Trivia Cleanup.
• Work with others to forge sustainable "trivia" and "pop culture" practices and policies. We agree with other editors that Wikipedia's coverage of "trivia" and "pop culture" interrelations should not distract from our basic coverage of any given subject. However, it is not desirable to restrict our coverage to "basic information"; any information that is compliant with core policies and well-organized improves the value of Wikipedia overall. We hope to establish a manner of organizing and presenting this content that is acceptable to the broad community of editors.

Active tasks

General summary of trivia and popular culture on Wikipedia

See the quick summary about trivia on this project's subpage.

A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.

Article improvement

This project is devoted to improving sections and articles that are solely focused on the pop-culture influence of subjects. These articles are like any other article, and they should describe the subject in a clear and informative way. The article should have a logical flow; related items should be grouped together, and unselective lists are discouraged. Alphabetical, regional, date and other forms of order should be applied. Where possible, lists should also be avoided in favour of prose. Some articles also need to present the subject with a more worldwide view.

Most of the articles covered by this WikiProject should be in Category:Topics in popular culture, Category:Fiction by topic, Category:Literature by topic or one of the subcategories. List "In popular culture" that need immediate attention for sourcing, better organization, introductory context, etc.:

• Cultural depictions of Abraham Lincoln
• Adolf Hitler in popular culture
• Mental illness in fiction
• 555 (telephone number)
• Classical elements in popular culture
• Satan in popular culture
• Orangutans in popular culture
• Nuclear weapons in popular culture
• Augustus in popular culture
• Nero in popular culture
  • This book has been suggested as a possible source for the above two articles; the link takes you to its listing in Worldcat, where you can search for a copy of it in your local or university library.
• Pirates in popular culture
• Climate change in popular culture
• Adaptations of the Epic of Gilgamesh
• Paradise Lost in popular culture
• Illuminati in popular culture
• Cultural influence of Star Trek - It's done in a much less list-y format and avoids the "in popular culture" title but it is similar content, it has some references but they probably need to be in-line citations to see how much is sourced and unsourced, I'm sure a lot more sourced info could be found. Could be a good place to start working.
• Tropical cyclones in popular culture - A major effort has been put in to improve the references on this one, however several items are proving problematic (See the talk page).

Good article candidates

This section is for potential Good Articles that need some additional attention and surface editing.

• Champagne in popular culture - expansion and sourcing
• Che Guevara in popular culture - cleanup and sourcing
• Cultural depictions of turtles and tortoises - sourcing, maybe some expansion
• Zombie (fictional) - bigger intro, some surface errors

Category maintenance

Category:Topics in popular culture should be cleaned up and put into good order. Articles that should not be in the category can be removed, and articles should be grouped into categories based on topic, like science, art, music, people, fictional characters, etc.

Articles facing deletion

Please list ongoing debates here. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Popular culture for past debates.

Articles facing deletion review

Please list ongoing reviews here.

Far-right subcultures

Far-right subcultures (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article's scope is incomprehensible and there is nothing worth salvaging. Also, every sentence in this article I have checked has had some sort of OR/SYNTH/failed verification issue.

Almost nothing in this article refers to subcultures at all except for 1 paragraph on white power skinheads, which we have a better article on. The rest of the article has nothing to do with subcultures at all, at least outside of how the "far-right" movement altogether can be considered subculture; if taken with that broader scope in mind it is simply duplicative of far-right politics. The rest of this article is made up entirely of sections on far-right organizations that aren't even subcultures (any more than the the rest of the far-right is) and a totally random section on fashion labels that also has nothing to do with subcultures.

A complete trainwreck. If this topic is even notable there is not a sentence in the article that would be useful to an article in it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:45, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related AfD discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:45, 24 September 2026 (UTC)
• Keep in some form: I don’t think the scope is incomprehensible. It’s just that the current content is not all within scope. Agree article has some issues but I don’t think those issues can’t be fixed. BobFromBrockley (talk) 22:01, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

  @Bobfrombrockley 1) What would we put in this article?

  2) There is not a single sentence salvagable. If I was to delete all the material that is either improperly cited or irrelevant, there would be nothing. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:03, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

  Off the top of my head I’d include racist skinheads and Nazi punks and look at the Oi scene and Blood and Honour. I’d look at online/Alt-Right meme culture, including groypers, 4Chan, etc, boogaloo boys, Proud Boys. I’d look at fashwave. I’d look at Active Clubs and combat subcultures. I’d look at Siege Culture and Accelerationism. I might look at the manosphere and incel culture. Very confident there are RSs for this and examples that haven’t come to my mind BobFromBrockley (talk) 06:29, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

  Oh and White power music, Nazi punk, Rock Against Communism, Nazi chic, National Socialist black metal, Asgardsrei festival, Shield and Sword (festival), Hammerskins, Vinlanders Social Club, Rock identitaire français, Esoteric neo-Nazism. Fascist mysticism. Also some aspects of neo-paganism (eg Armanen-Orden, Artgemeinschaft and of Heathenry in the United States (eg Asatru Folk Assembly, Wotansvolk) etc. Possibly also Völkisch movement, Germanenorden,Identitarian movement. Might want to look at cultural symbols eg Black Sun (symbol) and Fourteen words. BobFromBrockley (talk) 06:56, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

  A scope 100% redundant/duplicative of the main article, we'd have 2 of the same. How are any of those more or less "subcultural" than all far-right politics? Nazism and Neo-Nazism are subcultures, every single minority political party is a subculture, far-right politics itself is a subculture, because it is not the majority culture; but then why would we have a separate article based solely on a single descriptor that one may apply to it? There is nothing in far-right politics that would not go here. We would simply copy paste the entire far-right article, because the far-right itself can constitute a "subculture", and is considered such more than any 1 of your examples are. A random assortment of duplicate white supremacy topics is a scope that would entirely overlap with other articles. This is simply not a useful way to organize or discuss the content, and it is not actually a distinct topic from far-right politics in any way. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:25, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

  I think the clue to the difference is in the word Subculture and the fact it refers to culture rather than politics. The things I listed are subcultures as defined cultural studies, with distinct cultural practices, not political organisations with particular political perspectives BobFromBrockley (talk) 05:19, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  I don't think that's true, most of the things you mentioned are mostly or solely political, or are political ideologies, and I dispute that they are any more subcultures than general far-right politics; boogaloo boys, proud boys, Siege culture, and accelerationism, esoteric neo-nazism, fascist mysticism, neopaganism, incels, manosphere, etc, these are individual ideologies in the world of far right politics, not subcultures of it. The single exception is perhaps white power music and its dozens of varieties, which we already have an article on (even then mostly not described as a subculture). Everything has a culture, sure, but that's not actually what any of the sources discuss, and sources do not put them in this frame. If we're going to define ideologies as subcultures then as I said, the whole thing is a subculture - so what are we doing making a fork of it? PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:57, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  Well, it would be good to see what other editors think because to me the idea that a rock scene or a fashion style could be “solely political” seems idiosyncratic BobFromBrockley (talk) 12:53, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  The white power music scene is as I said the only possible exception here. If you're talking about Nazi chic, the whole thing about that is that it is not a far-right subculture, but the usage of these elements in fashion in a variety of cultures. PARAKANYAA (talk) 13:00, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  I’ve added a few potential sources on the article talk page which give several examples including some of those above, including Nsbm, fashwave, and the alt-right, as well as hardbass. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:30, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  I think PARAKANYAA's definition of "subculture" is overly restrictive. I'd be happy to describe most, maybe even all, of the things listed above as "subcultures" but if there is a better term than "subculture" then I'm open to switching to that. --DanielRigal (talk) 14:29, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  @DanielRigal If we're defining these things as subcultures, what would be something in far-right politics that isn't a subculture? I'm struggling to see any scope difference between these two pages if we use the broad definition of subculture. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:32, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  @PARAKANYAA have you read our subculture article? Because it’s not controversial to say a political party isn’t usually called a subculture but a scene with distinct music and style usually is.

  so for example the BNP isn’t a subculture but the NSBM scene is BobFromBrockley (talk) 18:16, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  Searching "British National Party" and "subculture" in tandem returns numerous results describing it as a subculture . There is an entire book chapter describing it as a subculture

  So yes, all of these sorts of groups would also be subcultures. Why wouldn't they be using that definition? There is 1-1 topic overlap, it is totally redundant to that page. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:26, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  Hmm. Reading Rhodes now. He says “the BNP attempts to project itself as a subcultural movement, imitating the ideas and dispositions of the dominant culture more effectively than the political mainstream… However, it is necessary to distinguish between the image the BNP overtly presents of itself as the guardian of English/British ethnic and cultural identity who, like other groups, simply wants to protect the right of the indigenous population, and the more esoteric ideology of the party. In reality, the BNP remains a counter-cultural movement, totally opposed to the norms and values of the dominant culture and reliant on a racially exclusive, anti-democratic political ideology.”

  I think he has a slightly odd notion of subculture, but he argues that the BNP isn’t one BobFromBrockley (talk) 23:40, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  I would say he's arguing it is a subcultural movement. Because of this, the actions and ideology of the party can, to some extent, be characterized less as counter-cultural, than as subcultural, but that it is not simply a subculture (p. 75) e.g. it is also a dangerous white supremacist group and therefore a counterculture as it is inherently opposed to democracy.

  I think this nicely illustrates the definitional issue this article faces, honestly. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:38, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

  Shaffer (the first hit) certainly doesn’t say the BNP is a subculture. He describes a far right skinhead Youth culture, emerging in Britain in the 1970s but internationalising in the 1980s and 1990s, in which far right organisations (the BNP and NF in the UK) attempted, with some success, to mobilise and become a political force within. BobFromBrockley (talk) 09:08, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

  The third hit is Shaffer again.[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0031322X.2013.842289] He again argues that youth culture in the form of skinhead subculture influenced fascism by bringing its subcultural network to the movement, but he doesn’t describe fascism itself or BNP in particular as A subculture. It’s certainly right that the white power skin scene is the main subculture identified in the literature and most clearly fits the subculture definition, but we can acknowledge that in the article. BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:30, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

  Still going through these hits. After Rhodes, the next two are reviews of Shaffer, by Copsey and Lorr. The latter concisely summarises Shaffer’s take: “fascist political activists in Britain coopted a small subset of the punk rock youth subculture to propel the fascist nationalist movement forward and, in a paradox, globalize nationalist fascism” BobFromBrockley (talk) 15:54, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

  Sure? I don't think this negates my point. PARAKANYAA (talk) 13:38, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  My point is that Shaffer is NOT saying the whole far right is a subculture, nor that the BNP is a subculture. There are some RSs who might suggest these, but there are far more who identify specific far right subcultures (most frequently but not only the white power skin scene) and discuss them in a scholarly way. Ergo this is a topic worthy of an encyclopedia article, albeit not the one we have now. BobFromBrockley (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  I never said that Shaffer said that, and I disagree with your reading, he does seem to propose that it is a subculture but this is supplanted by its status as a counterculture.

  There are still no sources about the actual nominal subject of the article, but a bunch of individual subtopics synthesized together when no source connects them at all. You cannot combine a bunch of different topics to get notability for a much broader topic. There is no source in this article that is actually about the subject. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:04, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• Neutral, leaning weak keep. There is definitely a valid topic here but the article is no good at all. I can see a case for WP:TNT but the alternative to deletion would be to prune it down to a stub by removing all the off-topic stuff, which is most of it. --DanielRigal (talk) 14:29, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  @DanielRigal if you have time to look at the article again could you let me know what you think? I’ve added in some rough holding content after looking at potential sources to see what a better version of the article could look like BobFromBrockley (talk) 20:42, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, that's definitely better than it was and good enough to make it a Keep from me. BTW, if we want an example of a failed subcultural parasitism then there were neo-Nazi attempts to take over some furry events a few years back which ended with the organisers, and the wider furry community, kicking the wikt:nazifurs out. Potential sources:

https://www.vice.com/en/article/even-furries-are-fighting-fascists/

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/krishrach/meet-the-furries-fighting-fascism

https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/2017/02/furred-reich-truth-about-nazi-furries-and-alt-right (Maybe, I can't read it as it is paywalled)

https://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/news/rocky-mountain-fur-convention-canned-over-furry-fascists/news-story/ec87af8318bbbb4927b176975c48db25 --DanielRigal (talk) 01:07, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

@DanielRigal Isn't this all still a coatrack of barely-related topics? We still have 0 sources on the actual subject of this article. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:11, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

• Weak keep per above. ProgramT (talk) 02:21, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Article alerts

If you want to be notified of updates to the following list as they happen, put Wikipedia:WikiProject Popular culture/Article alerts on your watchlist.

Article alerts

Articles for deletion

• 27 Sep 2026 – Witches in popular culture (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Einsof (t · c); see discussion (9 participants)
• 24 Sep 2026 – Far-right subcultures (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by PARAKANYAA (t · c); see discussion (3 participants)
• 23 Sep 2026 – Hug Your Mainframe Day (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by CaptainEek (t · c); see discussion (6 participants)
• 21 Sep 2026 – List of Trivial Pursuit editions (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by (Oinkers42) (t · c); see discussion (4 participants; relisted)
• 17 Sep 2026 – List of spurious works of fiction (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Vrxces (t · c); see discussion (9 participants; relisted)

Proposed deletions

• 20 Sep 2026 – Witches in popular culture (talk · edit · hist) PRODed by Kowal2701 (t · c) was deproded by Pharos (t · c) on 24 Sep 2026

Categories for discussion

• 08 Jul 2026 – Category:Fiction about therianthropy (talk · edit · hist) was CfDed by Zxcvbnm (t · c); see discussion
• 01 Jul 2026 – Category:Fictional superhumans by ability (talk · edit · hist) was CfDed by Zxcvbnm (t · c); see discussion
• 01 Jul 2026 – Category:Fictional superhumans (talk · edit · hist) was CfDed by Zxcvbnm (t · c); see discussion

Good article nominees

• 22 Jun 2026 – Ali Zafar vs. Meesha Shafi (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by M.Billoo2000 (t · c); start discussion

Articles to be split

• 23 Feb 2026 – Zombie (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Fgnievinski (t · c); see discussion

Articles for creation

• 04 Sep 2026 – Draft:Gaga (company) (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by ~2026-47089-17 (t · c)
• 18 Sep 2026 – Draft:SuperCarlinBrothers (talk · edit · hist) submitted for AfC by Sjeevan32 (t · c) was declined

Updated daily by AAlertBot — Discuss? / Report bug? / Request feature?
Click to watch (Subscribe via  RSS  Atom) · Find Article Alerts for other topics!

Trivia cleanup

This project also encourages integrating "Trivia" sections and eliminating the backlog of articles in Category:Articles with trivia sections. See the related Wikipedia:WikiProject Trivia Cleanup

Information salvage

List now-deleted trivia and popular culture sections here that could have been sourced, organized, and integrated more in compliance with Wikipedia:Trivia sections. Try not to start battles over "trivia" in these articles; just improve their content in ways that hopefully can be considered uncontroversial.

• Kraft Dinner In popular culture or

Article statistics

• WikiProject Popular Culture article assessment instructions page
• List of project articles by quality
• Log of project activity

Popular Culture pages by quality
Quality
	Total
Assessed	0
Total	0

Participants

Participating in the project is easy! Simply click the "edit" link above this section and add your name to the bottom of the list. It should look like this: * ~~~~ If you like, leave a short comment and then save the page and you are done. Welcome to the project. All you have to do is grab a shovel and start digging through pages that are part of the project scope.

Ways you can participate include:

1. The list of project articles is a good place to start. Scroll to the bottom of the list and look for any articles which have not been assessed, or simply look in Category:Unassessed Popular Culture articles for articles which have not been assessed. Read the article, and then give the unassessed article an importance and quality rating by editing the talk page and adding assessment parameters to the project tag. If there are other projects already associated with the article, make sure all the assessments agree with each other and change the others if necessary. For more instructions on how to assess articles, please read the project assessment instructions page.
2. You can improve these articles by making useful edits. See Wikipedia:"In popular culture" articles for more information on how you can improve these articles.
3. Also, if you know of any good popular culture articles that haven't been tagged, please add the project banner to their respective talk pages. Member consensus has dictated that only articles which are focused solely on cultural depictions of a subject should be tagged with the project banner. These kinds of articles are normally titled "Subject X in popular culture", "Cultural depictions of Subject X", "Adaptations of Subject X" or some variation thereof. Please assess the article when you tag them with the project banner, but if you're not sure, it's ok to leave the assessment fields blank. The project banner and other useful templates can be found at the bottom of this page.

• Father Goose 22:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
• NickPenguin_(contribs) 23:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
• Ned Scott 00:26, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
• DGG (talk) 00:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
• ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 03:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
• Ozmaweezer 12:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
• John Carter 17:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
• MattHucke^(t) 15:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
• Law Lord 23:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
• Captain Impulse 02:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
• Stardust8212 15:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
• Moheroy 09:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
• Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 10:25, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
• Pomte 11:48, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
• Doc Rocktopus
• ErgoSum88 (talk) 06:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
• Dorftrottel (vandalise) 19:01, April 11, 2008
• Casliber
• Durova^Charge! 16:24, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
• 23skidoo (talk) 02:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
• SatuSuro 10:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
• Agree on the principle of verifiability (e.g. Lost in HL2E2) Sceptre ^(talk) 17:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
• Fractious Jell 23:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
• Icelilly (talk) 00:21, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
• Iamthejustice (talk) 20:34, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
• I guess since I created Girl Scout Cookies in popular culture, Pinnipeds in popular culture, and Otters in popular culture I should be on this list. Azoreg (talk) 20:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
• --PhillieLWillie (was Alien joe)(Talk) 22:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
• Mr_pand [talk | contributions] 14:00, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
• ChrisDHDR 19:02, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
• Secret Saturdays-enter my lair......and seek audience with thy colonel (or at least say hi to the Ice Climbers)
• Sean (talk || contribs) 03:24, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
• AWHS (talk) 10:44, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
• Zyrath (talk) 16:13, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
• Another Type of Zombie ^talk 13:17, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
• Wahrmund (talk) 16:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC) We are the majority!
• Teagrant (talk). 11 May 2011 at 2:49 pm. EST. – Drafting an article called "Geek girl", and MatthewVanitas kindly suggested posting to this group for advice. In addition to finding Reliable sources, I'd appreciate any rule-of-thumb tips for how to find "professional-quality" evidence of a phenomenon that's still in its early stages. Thanks.
• TheoMorgan (talk) 21:12, 3 July 2011 (UTC) I completely agree with the principle. A very vocal, and overly fussy minority are deleting this information on a whim because it offends them, but the fact so many articles have it means it IS relevant. I've had trouble with my edit of the Heaton Norris article, because a certain set of editors seem determined to keep the article as dry and boring as possible.
• Lx 121 (talk) 18:28, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
• ZappaOMati 22:50, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
• No hazmats (talk) 12:50, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
• JudyCS (talk) 06:20, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
• Amerikanskaya Stilyaga (talk) 12:30, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
• Dana Leigh Brand (talk) 16:17, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
• Qxukhgiels (talk) 21:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
• RazingRazor (talk) 18:39, 7 March 2015 (UTC) Definitely agree with the principles and goals of this project. I'm convinced that the only reason this is even an issue is because a lot of people get intimidated by the editing process and never start. Shame, really.
• AfroThundr3007730 (talk) 07:55, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
• IllogicMink (talk) 06:49, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
• --The Wrong Tea (talk) 16:28, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
• SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  08:15, 14 June 2015 (UTC) (I clean up pop-culture sections, and have helped write guidelines and essays regarding them. I agree that this material, when very selective and properly sourced, is often of considerable encyclopedic value. That said, I cannot agree with the activistic wording of this WikiProject's rationale as of this writing, and would hope to see its tone moderated.)
• Itherina (talk) 04:39, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
• Dream Focus 01:08, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Doctormomma (talk) 00:43, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
• garriefisher (talk) 00:36, June 4, 2024 (UTC)
• SavagePanda845 (talk) 15:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
• TheWiki93 (talk) 05:06, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Resources

The resources below may contain scholarly, critical analysis on cultural topics, which can help to establish notability, provide real world context, and move articles beyond simple lists of primary sources.

• The Journal of Popular Culture (subscription required)
• The Popular Culture Studies Journal

Project templates

Userboxen

These are userboxen showing your support for WPPC. Feel free to make and add your own creations.

Syntax	Userbox
{{User WPPC}}	This user is a member of WikiProject Popular culture
{{User:ErgoSum88/trivia}}	This user likes "Trivia" and "In popular culture" information, and supports their inclusion.

Project notice

Articles within the scope of WPPC should be tagged with the template. For instructions on usage see {{WikiProject Popular Culture}}.

Barnstar

Users who make significant contributions to the project may be awarded the WPPC Barnstar. For instructions on usage see {{The Popular Culture Barnstar}}.

		The Popular Culture Barnstar
		For outstanding work in the field of Popular Culture. --John Q. User 10:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

See also

• Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not § Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information (policy)
• Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trivia sections § "In popular culture" and "Cultural references" material (guideline)
• Wikipedia:"In popular culture" content (essay)
• Wikipedia:Handling trivia (essay)