Talk:Pennywise/GA2

GA review #2

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Gommeh (talk · contribs) 19:54, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 03:30, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

I will be taking this one on. Expect comments in the coming days. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:30, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Sure, thanks for taking this up! I think I've addressed the concerns that were raised after my last nomination well enough by @Rollinginhisgrave (see their talk page). Let me know if there are any issues and I'll fix them. Gommeh 📖/🎮 12:01, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Six GA Criteria

1. Article is well-written. Information is lacking in places.

2. No OR, all info is cited in the article. One uncited statement.

3. Coverage is broad in depth and focus. Shows multiple aspects of the subject.

4. Article appears neutral, and does not appear to hold a significantly negative nor positive stance on the subject.

5. Article appears stable. Does not appear to have had any major vandalism occur.

6. Article uses multiple one fair use image with proper rationale.

Lead

-I feel you could merge the film/TV adaptations into the same paragraph as the literary summary.

• Done. See Overall below. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-"uncanny" how? Uncanny like uncanny valley? Uncanny as in coulrophobia? I'd clarify.

• See Overall below. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Concept

-Is It directly a Lovecraftian horror? It seems unconnected from the mythos as a glance, so if it's only comparing, I'd specify that.

• See Overall below. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-This is an article-wide thing, but nearly every reference to "It" capitalizes all of the Its, even those not referring to the creature directly. For instance, itself likely does not need to be capitalized. As another example, whenever it uses "Its", most of the time this does not need a capital if It is already specified earlier in the sentence.

• See Overall below. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-"However, this is not Its true form, but the true form of the creature in the physical realm which is the closest representation of Its true form, as Its true form is genderless." This is uncited.

• Removed the uncited sentence.

Appearances

-Who is the Turtle? This is unclear.

• See Overall below. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-"It is generally referred to as male, usually appearing as Pennywise" This is already stated in the first paragraph, so I'd axe one of the two mentions here.

• Axed. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-The novel section refers to several events in an unclear chronology. In what order does all this take place? When is It first encountered? When do they encounter the spider form? What events take place in which novels? Additionally, many events referred to in the development section are not elaborated upon in the Appearances section.

• See Chronology below. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-This section also refers to a lot of stuff not explained; what are the ironworks explosion and the Ritual of Chud, for example?

• I've added information on the things that were not explained sufficiently, including the ironworks explosion and ritual of Chud. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-"Shocked by the Losers' victory, It is continually surprised by the children's victories over It and near the end," I'd remove the beginning "shocked" bit since it's a bit repetitive.

• See Overall below. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-"and an enormous storm damages the downtown part of Derry." Is this as a result of banishing It?

• Yes it is, and I've added a source from a critic to back that up. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-"In the 1990 miniseries, Pennywise is portrayed by English actor Tim Curry." What does It do in this series? Is it a direct adaptation of the novel with no changes? If so, specify that.

• I've added the information you've asked for. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-I'd put a lot of the dev info on the Skarsgard incarnation's casting in the development section, since that is real-world and not-universe information. Additionally, I'd clarify what It actually does in this adaptation. Is it the same as the novels? Are there any differences?

• Done. Also, I clarified that Skarsgard's Pennywise doesn't shapeshift into any of the classic horror movie villains the way Curry's does. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Analysis/Reception

-I'd make analysis a sub-section of Reception; it feels strange it is covered in a separate heading and before any discussion of how the character was received by the public and critics.

• Done. See Overall below. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-"Scholars and critics say that Pennywise represents a turning point in how clowns are seen in popular culture..." I'd include this in the reception section given that this is more showcasing the impact of the character than it is scholars analyzing the character. This is doubly so since this discussed significantly in the reception as is. -The last paragraph states that "scholars" have discussed this when only one scholarly work is cited. I'd just cite whoever wrote it instead of attributing it to a broad group.

• Both are done. See Overall below. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-"Author Darren Shan cited Pennywise as an inspiration behind the character Mr. Dowling in his 12.5 book serial Zom-B." This is a PRIMARY source for one person's book series; given Pennywise's impact, this seems UNDUE to highlight one particular author not discussed in secondary sources.

• Removed per WP:UNDUE. Not sure how that one slipped through the cracks. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-Per WP:ROTTENTOMATOES, there is no consensus on if critic reviews from the site are reliable. Given how big It is, I'd try to find some reviews of the 1990 series to pluck bits discussing Curry's performance from. Same for Skarsgard's performance.

• Done. I've left the Rotten Tomatoes links in, but I've substantiated them with citations to reviews from RS (e.g. NY Times, LA Times, etc.). Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

-I'd merge the first and second paragraphs of the clown sightings.

• Done. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Overall

@Gommeh: There's a lot of work needed for this article and I'm not sure all of it is able to be done in the scope of this review. As much as I hate to say it, I'm going to have to fail this for the time being. I do believe this has what it takes to make GA status in time though, so keep trucking on. Kudos to you for taking on such a big one as your first character article as well. If there's anything I can help with or clarify in regards to this article, then let me know on my talk page and I'll do what I can. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 19:51, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

• I've merged the sentence "Pennywise was portrayed by Tim Curry in the 1990 television adaptation and by Bill Skarsgård in the 2017 film adaptation, its 2019 sequel It Chapter Two and the upcoming HBO Max series It: Welcome to Derry." into the first paragraph.
• Both coulrophobia and uncanny valleys are mentioned in the article and in sources, so I've rephrased it to say "Scholars and critics have noted the effectiveness of this design as clowns are commonly viewed as uncanny (both in the sense of coulrophobia and in uncanny valleys)." I'm not quite sure about the wording I used here, but hopefully it at least clarifies what I meant by uncanny here.
• Deleted the sentence "However, this is not Its true form, but the true form of the creature in the physical realm which is the closest representation of Its true form, as Its true form is genderless." as although I believe this to be true, I don't see any sources ever arguing this.
• The Turtle is already briefly mentioned in the "appearances in the novel" section as "Its natural enemy". I've added that the Turtle is seen as a benevolent force, but I'm not quite sure what else I can add about the turtle. Let me know if you think that's good enough or you think I should still expand on that.
• Made the Reception section a subsection of Analysis.
• Removed the Darren Smythe sentence. Not sure why that was even there in the first place (I didn't add that lol).
• Got rid of the sentence "It is generally referred to as male..."
• Merged the first and second paragraphs of the clown sightings section.
• I've removed the "shocked by the Losers' victory" part in the appearances section.
• I've also done my best to address the capitalization issue you mentioned.
• Moved the "Scholars and critics [...] role as a figure of fun." paragraph to the reception section and clarified that Yankovich also examined amnesia in her essay. Grammar and wording may need to be tightened up there though, so let me know what you think.

I'll work on the rest of the things you said over the coming days. Gommeh 📖/🎮 03:36, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

@Pokelego999: After a look through the source that describes It as a Lovecraftian horror, I've determined that the source states that It is a Lovecraftian horror and is not just being compared to one. The trouble is, I can't think of a good way to word that in the article that's better than what I already have. Thoughts? Gommeh 📖/🎮 17:46, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Chronology

@Pokelego999: The novel section could I think be clearer in terms of how it depicts the events that happen in the novel. You said In what order does all this take place? When is It first encountered? When do they encounter the spider form? What events take place in which novels? Additionally, many events referred to in the development section are not elaborated upon in the Appearances section.
Q: When is It first encountered?
A: It is first seen in the book when it appears to Georgie in the sewer (p13-15 in the version I have). In the book it is stated this occurs in 1958 and that is the same year when the Losers meet each other and defeat It for the first time. It is finally killed off when the Losers return to Derry in 1985.
Q: What events take place in which novels?
A: There's only one novel, but both the 1990 miniseries and the films were split into two parts for length. The novel is over 1100 pages long so it would be difficult to cover all that in just a few hours worth of filming, so I can see why someone who hasn't read the book would be confused. In the book, the events I mention in the article happen in the following years, although I'm not too sure if it's important to explicitly state it for some of them. Note that in the films, the entire story is shifted so that Georgie's death takes place in 1990 and the Losers return to Derry in 2016. I've put the events down in the table below in the order in which I mention them in the article.

Timetable

Event	Year in novel
Murder of Georgie	1958
Manipulation of Henry Bowers	1958 and 1985 both
Manipulation of Tom Rogan	1985
Losers see Its eggs, the spider form, and the deadlights	1985
Story narrated from Its perspective	1958 and 1985
Disappearance of settlers from Derry Township	1740-43
Ironworks explosion	1900s

Hopefully that helps clear things up. Should I rearrange the order that I mention these events in the article and/or be more specific about when everything happens? Please let me know. Gommeh 📖/🎮 23:27, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Critics argue that the killing of It directly causes the storm that damages downtown Derry. Specifically, I've clarified this by citing both Roy and the novel after the sentence "It is finally killed 27 years later in a second Ritual of Chüd,[36] causing an enormous storm to damage downtown Derry." Gommeh 📖/🎮 23:27, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Differences from the novel

As for the differences between the novel, film and miniseries, I changed the appearances section like so:

In the 1990 miniseries, Pennywise is portrayed by English actor Tim Curry. The story remains mostly the same compared to the novel, except the duration of Its resting periods is extended from 27 years to 30 years.

In the 2017 film adaptation, It, its 2019 sequel It Chapter Two, and its prequel television series It – Welcome to Derry, Pennywise is portrayed by Swedish actor Bill Skarsgård. English actor Will Poulter was originally cast as Pennywise, with Curry describing the role as a "wonderful part" and wishing Poulter the best of luck, but the latter dropped out of the production due to scheduling conflicts and the first film's original director Cary Fukunaga leaving the project. IndieWire's Jamie Righetti says the most obvious difference between the book and the films is the time difference — the novel, for instance, has Georgie's death in 1957 and Its final defeat in 1985, but the films have these events in 1989 and 2016 respectively. Righetti also notes that in the film the characters do not manage to recover Georgie's body. The classic horror movie villains Pennywise shapeshifts into are also gone from the films, although the leper does make an appearance. In It Chapter Two, Pennywise's final form changes from a giant spider to what Forbes' Dani Di Placido described as a "giant clown spider". The storm that ensues after Pennywise's defeat is replaced with the destruction of the house where the battle took place.

Skarsgård's Pennywise appears as a background character in the family-friendly film Space Jam: A New Legacy, which is also distributed by Warner Bros. In 2023, it was originally announced that Skarsgård would not be participating in the prequel series It – Welcome to Derry because he wanted to leave the character behind and focus on other roles, but by 2025 he had changed his mind.

Hopefully this helps. Gommeh 📖/🎮 00:08, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Unexplained events

I've also added details on the Turtle, the Other, the Ritual of Chüd, and the historical events you mentioned (e.g. the ironworks explosion, for instance). Let me know if you think it's good enough. Gommeh 📖/🎮 00:08, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Differences between the book and films

I've moved the sections on casting up to the "concept" section as I felt they'd read more naturally there. I also adjusted the sentence order to flow a little more naturally. Let me know what you think of it now. This was done in reference to when you said, I'd put a lot of the development info on the Skarsgard incarnation's casting in the development section, since that is real-world and not-universe information. Gommeh 📖/🎮 14:58, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Second look

@Gommeh: Now that edits have been made article wide, I'm going to contain new comments here so they do not become riddled across the previous span of review and become hard to follow. If I do not bring up a particular change here, assume that I either have no issues with it, or I have a different gripe with the section, in which case I'll discuss it below.

- In the first paragraph of the lead, would it be possible to summarize briefly that the Losers Club and It had conflict after they became aware of it? Something like "The Losers come into conflict with It, eventually resulting in Its demise many years later during the events of the book..." or something like that. Should help give a more complete summary of what goes on in the story.

• Done. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

-Altered your uncanny valley bit's wording slightly, hopefully should read a bit more smoothly now.

-Clarify the Poulter info is about the 2017 film. I'd also create sub-headings: One for the novel (Which contains the first two paras), one for the television series (which contains the third para) and one for the film adaptation (Which consists of the last four paragraphs). The latter two can be merged into one film and TV section if you like, but make sure to note the distinction between the two via subheadings given film info seems far more substantive than the TV info.

• Done, subheadings have also been created. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

-"He felt that modern clowns looked "cheap" and were too tied to social events and circuses, saying he preferred the look of 19th-century clowns.[1] Thus, he and his sister Barbara (the film's producer) decided to use the 1800s and earlier periods as an inspiration.[2][3]" I'd include this before the reference of the various historical periods in the same para given these subjects are associated.

• Done. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

-"Even Pennywise's eyes have unsettling tricks to them" Seems very opinionated. I'd reword.

• I just changed it to "One of Pennywise's eyes subtly drifts off into another direction, giving him a not-quite-human stare." Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

-What happens after they duel across the macroverse?

• I've included information on that. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

-", such as when Pennywise manipulates the school bully, Henry Bowers, to eliminate the remaining members of the Losers' Club in summer 1958 and again in 1985.[1] In 1985 it also manipulates Beverly's husband Tom Rogan to capture Audra and bring her to its lair in an attempt to use her as bait for the Losers." I feel this bit here isn't too helpful, since It being able to manipulate is easily understood without examples, and makes the chronology less confusing given we don't know what these years signify yet.

• I removed the part about Henry Bowers, seeing it as redundant. I moved the part about Audra to a later part in the summary - this was necessary because I mention that she goes catatonic later and it wouldn't make sense otherwise IMO. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

-I feel the novel summary is very confusing; the end of the novel is described in the second paragraph before events that take place towards its start, which are discussed in the third paragraph after a mention of events that take place before the book from the perspective of It. I'd re-order these events to follow the same order as they do in the novel; the first para is fine for setting the backstory, but the rest needs to be re-ordered for this to make sense to someone who hasn't read the novel.

• Rearranged the novel summary and added some more details that were not present. I tried my best to arrange things in the order they happen in and I think I did a good job. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

-The differences section makes zero sense without any plot summary of what actually goes on in the adaptations. When I say discuss the differences, I mean only if there are differences to discuss within the summary. For instance, hypothetically, if It's motives were different in the film, that would warrant mentioning. Include at least some summary of what goes in the TV and film series, even if it's just "In the 1990 TV series, It fulfills a largely identical role to that of the novel..." and ditto for the film. The differences mean nothing to me if I know nothing about the adaptations themselves.

• I've included the things you asked for. Its core motives are the same among all three mediums however, (that is, to feed). In order to address your concern, I did add "In the 2017 film, Pennywise says that fear is "tasty" and "beautiful", but does not go into much more detail than that in either film." as well. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

-I'd label the entire Analysis section to be something like "Impact", and make Reception and Analysis separate sub-sections of the Impact section; the reception is inherently not character analysis, as it is instead how the character is received by the public. These two things should be discussed together, but not by putting un-even weight onto one of the two halves of it.

• Done. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

-I see no change to the Rotten Tomatoes citations. Additionally, Forbes cannot be used, per WP:FORBES. Contributor pieces are not reliable.

• Gotten rid of the Rotten Tomatoes citations and replaced the Forbes one with something from IGN that said basically the same thing. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Many of your edits have helped address a lot of my previous concerns, but as of right now, these are the big gripes I have with the article. I'll likely do another more in-depth run-through of Reception/Analysis and sourcing once these are addressed. Once the above is hit up this I believe should be the bulk of the issues resolved. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:46, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

I've addresssed the issues that you indicated. Hope this helps. Gommeh 📖/🎮 16:15, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

@Gommeh Some more plot quibbles before getting to the big stuff:

-Remember to introduce the characters in the plot as if it is the first time you see them in the article (I.e, hyperlink, give full names, who they are, etc). Did some fixes on this to help but I may have missed stuff, and many other characters, especially in the third paragraph are un-introduced or explained in terms of significance.

-Clarify what a "slug" is. Is it a Slug?

• Nope. Linked to Slug (projectile). Will work on the other stuff tomorrow. Gommeh 📖/🎮 01:45, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

-"It is surprised by the children's victories in battle and near the end of the book, it begins to question its preconceived notions of superiority. However, It never believes that the individual children are strong enough to defeat it, only through the Other working through them as a group could they have won in battle." Are there multiple encounters after the ritual? It's not entirely clear.

• Chronologically, yes, 27 years later (as adults). In the book, there's at least one (the final battle) but doubt there's more. Gommeh 📖/🎮 01:45, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

-" to restore their memories." Restore their memories of what? Nothing indicates they lost their memories.

• Must have forgotten to put that in there. I've clarified that they lose their memories of Derry: "The Losers eventually all drift apart and go their separate ways in life, and except for Mike who remembers everything, they forget about Derry and about each other in the process." Gommeh 📖/🎮 12:45, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

-Not sure the entire last paragraph is super relevant given it's not about It at all.

• Fair enough. I've removed most of the last paragraph, except for the first sentence which I think could be relevant. I've appended it to the end of the paragraph above it and changed it to read "The Losers plan to return to their homes and gradually begin to forget about It, Derry, and each other once again." For good measure, I've added a citation to it. Gommeh 📖/🎮 12:45, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

-Not sure the fair use image is helpful or necessary given how blurry it is and how it serves a purely decorative function.

• Yeah, good call. I've removed it. I thought it may be better to visually show the battle though. Gommeh 📖/🎮 12:45, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

-Still not sure why the two film and TV series sub-headings are separate; merge them into one sub-heading. Many differences between the book and adaptations also lack citations.

• With regards to the film and miniseries headings, I'm assuming you meant the ones under the concept section. I have merged them under one heading "Miniseries and films". I have added citations to the films (as much as those would, I suppose, be PRIMARY, I think it is warranted) where needed in the differences section. Gommeh 📖/🎮 12:45, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

@Gommeh this is in relation to the plot summary. There are two subheadings for the miniseries/films; I have no issue with the conception section. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 14:40, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying, fixed. Gommeh 📖/🎮 14:55, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

-I'd put Reception before Analysis in the Impact section. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:24, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

• Done. Gommeh 📖/🎮 12:45, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

  @Gommeh Added a hatnote to Appearances. In terms of Reception, after a brief once over:

  -Another general "Scholars and critics"; do they state in the paper you're citing it's a general assumption within the scholarly community?

• I can get rid of that, but I'm not quite sure how to introduce the reception section without it. After giving the paper another review, I am unsure if it can be used to back up that claim. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"Some scholars suggest that Pennywise's shapeshifting" Generalized again when only one scholar cites this.

• Added a few more citations to the essay collection that back this up. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -Not a requirement, but given the Atlantic piece is entirely about Pennywise, there should definitely be more in it beyond just a single quote. I'd reword this to incorporate more info from the article if possible.

• Assuming you mean this one. I added some more of Sophie Gilbert's analysis of Curry's performance. The article is pretty short so I don't know if I can add much more than that. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"A survey by the University of South Wales indicated that movie clowns such as Pennywise or the Joker contribute at least partially to some people's coulrophobia." makes more sense discussed above with other discussions of how this has affected coulrophobia at the start of the first paragraph.

• Moved to the first sentence of the reception section. Not quite sure how good of an intro it would be, but it's better than what I had before. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"However, not all reception of Curry's Pennywise was positive." You cite one negative review, which makes this setup sentence a bit undo when nearly all reception is positive. I'd either add more negative reviews or remove this transitionary sentence.

• Removed. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"that he would not revisit It" As in the franchise or rewatching this particular film?

• The source states that it is referring to the novel. I have clarified that. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"reviewer Katie Kilkenny of Pacific Standard felt that clowns "remain forever terrifying." Clarify what this has to do with Pennywise in particular. (Also this is not cited to the Pacific Standard)

• Must have forgotten to hit the "insert citation" button, thanks for catching that! I've clarified that she felt that clowns being scary was one of the key reasons behind the 2017 film's success. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -Does source 56 verify that multiple scholars said this?

  -"Another scholar" name the scholar.

• Done. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"shapeshifting into iconic horror villains" This is not discussed anywhere else in the article iirc and so has no elaboration.

• I've put in an explanatory footnote by that sentence with citations from the book. I don't feel it's much more important than that, however, so I'm unsure about putting it somewhere else. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"She cites the homophobic murder of Adrian Mellon at the start of the book as an example." This again is not explained earlier on nor is it elaborated on here in the reception. Either clarify this here or use another example if possible that is discussed in the article (Or if it is important, mention it in the plot)

• Added that detail in the plot section. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"Yankovich also writes that Pennywise was the very origin of the evil that haunted Derry every generation" So? This is basically plot summary. If he is, what is the importance here? Clarify.

• Added context. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"of the same Stephen King trope" what trope? This is unclear.

• You're right, I've decided to delete it as I'm not quite sure how best to explain it concisely. This is a minor detail at best. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"In one scene, Bill muses to himself on the flight to Maine from London that Pennywise had been in Derry for so long that perhaps the Derry townsfolk had come to understand the creature. On a related note, Giannini believes that Pennywise embodies the fear of stranger danger." The first point seems disconnected from the rest of the paragraph and the stranger danger bit is already present earlier in the Impact section. I'd axe this bit in particular.

• Done. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"concluding that Gacy was a key part of the moral panics of the 1980s" What does this have to do with Pennywise? Elaborate.

• I don't believe that is super important, so I have deleted that part instead. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• -"One academic essay suggests that It is ultimately about how people relate to their own fears." Clarify what this has to do in particular with Pennywise.

• Deleted. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• A lot of the analysis feels more like analysis of the book tangentially mentioning Pennywise; make sure to keep the focus on the analysis of Pennywise the character and not get too distracted from that focus. Discussion of It can go in the It article, discussion focused on Pennywise should be focused in this article. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:23, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• Tried to delete as many of the tangential parts as I can, but I am not sure if I got everything. Please let me know if there's something I missed. Gommeh 📖/🎮 15:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

  Spotchecking 20, 79, 65, 86, 100, 39, 18, 6, 64, 94.

  Can't view 79, 65, 86, 100, 39, so I'd appreciate text from them.

  18 does not verify that ""90% of the time he's suckering kids in," though 17 does. I'm not sure what 18's adding here that 17 isn't. Citations 5 and 6 are confusing because of how much information they're citing. Just cite either the film or sources discussing the particular actors. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 22:49, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

  Removing 18, it doesn't really add too much now I think about it.

  Citations 5 and 6 are already citing the films themselves; I've cut down on how much information is in the citations themselves (so that 5 for instance now reads "Andy Muschietti, director. (September 8, 2017). It (Motion picture). OCLC 1013560941." instead of something that's two or three times that long and doesn't mean much in the context of the article).

  Citation 79 (using revision ID 1311805742) is from the book, p.552: "The clown was gone. Dracula was standing at the top of the lefthand stairway, but it was no movie Dracula; it was not Bela Lugosi or Christopher Lee or Frank Langella or Francis Lederer or Reggie Nalder. An ancient man-thing with a face like a twisted root stood there. Its face was deadly pale..." This Dracula, revealed to be Pennywise shapeshifting, later taunts Ben about his low chances of defeating Pennywise with the other Losers.

  Citation 65 is a clipping from the New York Times in 1990, and it says: "The good moments, though, are choice, helped considerably by Tim Curry's lip-smacking portrayal of the horrifying Pennywise. Equally impressive are the youngsters used for the extensive childhood sequences..."

  Citation 86: "The reason It endures for so long is that the people participate in its cycle of torture by never fully facing the trauma It inflicts upon or around themselves; [...] The same can be said of the townspeople in King’s work. Whether observed in the Bradley Gang shootout, the axe massacre at the Sleepy Silver Dollar in 1905, the Kitchener Ironworks explosion in 1908, the 1930 fire at the Black Spot, or any of the other traumatic moments in Derry’s past linked to It, the people continuously try to forget them rather than face what these events mean and try to evolve or change."

  Citation 100, from The Greenville News, doesn't mention the film or the character directly, and I suppose no one really paid attention to it. I'll remove it.

  Citation 39 is from the book, and here Beverly meets "Mrs. Kersh", who she thinks is an old woman at first but then later reveals herself to be Pennywise, shapeshifting into an old hag/witch similar to the ones seen in classic fairy tales: "Her teeth were very bad--strong-looking, but bad all the same. They were yellow, and the front two had crossed each other. The canines seemed very long, almost like tusks. They were white... when she came to the door she smiled and you thought to yourself how white they were. [thought Beverly]. Suddenly she was not just a little frightened. Suddenly she wanted--needed--to be away from here. [...] 'My father,' she said, pronouncing it fadder, and Beverly saw that her dress had also changed. It had become a scabrous, peeling black. The cameo was a skull, its jaw hung in a diseased gape. 'His name was Robert Gray, better known as Bob Gray, better known as Pennywise the Dancing Clown. Although that was not his name, either. But he did love his joke, my fadder.' [...] 'Oh, my fadder and I are one,' she said." Gommeh 📖   🎮 00:14, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  For 79; I assume the other citation next to it verifies the Black Lagoon Monster? Rest check out and the other gripes are minor so I will elect to pass this for now. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:35, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  That's correct! It does indeed verify the Black Lagoon monster. Gommeh 📖   🎮 02:40, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

References

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.