Talk:Spring-heeled Jack/Archive 2

SHJ in Monmouth, 1948

Mention of this alleged sighting has been added and deleted a couple of times recently (not by me)... for the record, the earliest mention I have of the supposed Monmouth incident is a one-sentence mention on fuschiashockz.co.uk, an online cyberpunk/mysteries 'zine, dating to the summer of 2003. Text reads, in full:

"The last recorded sighting of Spring heeled Jack came in 1948 when the

people of Monmouth in Wales saw a strange white clad man jumping back and forth between the banks of a river."

No source is given and I've never encountered mention of the incident elsewhere... it's certainly not well evidenced enough to be added here. Mikedash 18:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Alsop and Sheffield

'He escaped conviction only because Jane Alsop insisted her attacker had breathed fire, and Millbank admitted he could do no such thing. There is little doubt that this, the best documented of all Jack's activities, was the work of a drunken carpenter.' How can there be little doubt if the witness herself said he 'breathed fire'? Also, has anyone else heard of the sightings from the 60's and 70's from Sheffield?(Halbared 10:34, 11 May 2006 (UTC))

The passage is confused because the first sentence you quote was written by the main author of the article, Shauri, and the second was interpolated a few weeks ago by a more sceptical user. Typical Wikipedia, in other words.

As for Sheffield, yes, reports from 1873 are documented; haven't got anything from the 1860s and would be interested to hear from anyone who does.Mikedash 12:25, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Oblivion Reference

I have been watching the revert war over the pop culture reference of Spring Heeled Jack in the Oblivion game for a while now. I see no rhyme or reason for why this reference keeps getting removed. How is mentioning that Oblivion has a reference to Spring Heeled Jack less relevant than a little known band or that Morrissey has a partial reference in a song title? —Asatruer 19:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

The various entries listed under pop culture are to help provide a feeling for how public perception of Spring Heeled Jack have changed over time. A minor mention of the name attached to a video game artifact that is not even important enough to be listed in the article about said game does nothing to impact public perception. Combine this with the wording of the addition placing greater emphasis on the game and the company that produces it as opposed to the mention itself and you are likely to find a very healthy number of people viewing the addition as spam. --Allen3 ^talk 00:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

If your concern is that mentioning Oblivion as having the wrong emphasis, rather than completely removing the reference, changing the emphasis would seem the better course of action. Though if the primary issue you have is that it does nothing to impact the public perception of Spring Heeled Jack, than I do not see how the Morrissey song or the band Spring Heeled Jack does this, nor — in all fairness — do I see the "recent" comic authors like Ver Curtiss, Kevin Olson and David Hitchcock as having any impact on this public perception of Spring Heeled Jack. It seems to me to be inconsistent to single out the Oblivion reference.
Perhaps renaming the "Spring Heeled Jack in popular culture" section is in order? How about "Spring Heeled Jack in literature"?
As for the "very healthy number of people viewing the addition as spam".
Jooler, Centauri, Ziul Leirbag, Bobblewik and myself have all either replace a removed Oblivion reference, or edited an existing Oblivion reference without removing it. Compared to Allen3, JeremyA and DreamGuy who have consistantly removed the Oblivion reference. By numbers alone, it looks as though both opinions on the matter seem to be roughly equal, with neither being a healthy majority. —Asatruer 15:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

As you do not agree with the argument that the referenced item is only an tertiary item and thus not significant, you must still deal with the requirements of Wikipedia:Verifiability. I have done some web searches and found numerous chat room references but nothing resembling a reliable source that supports the claim that the item has the properties described or that the item has any sort of connection to Spring Heeled Jack. --Allen3 ^talk 11:47, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I think you will find that Oblivion having an item called "Boots of Springheel Jak" is more verifiable from reliable sources as an item in that game than that the Morrissey song "Spring Heeled Jim" has anything to do with Sping Heeled Jack. If the Morrissey song is good enough to stay on the page with only a name that happens to be similar to the name of the article, I see no reason why an item in Oblivion that happens to have a name more similar to the name of the article should be repeatedly removed from the article. —Asatruer 15:29, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The requested reference for Spring Heeled Jim located and added. --Allen3 ^talk 16:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

That referenced article draws no connection between the song title "Spring Heeled Jim" and the english folklore character Spring Heeled Jack. —Asatruer 17:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Remomved as horribly trivial and unencyclopedic. A mere mention in a game for an item based loosely upon a topic in no way meets the level of mention in an encyclopedia article. These kind of references do not meet notability guidelines and are routinely removed on other article, so of course they need to be removed here. DreamGuy 07:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Please explain why you feel a game reference is trivial fictcruft crap and why you are so vehement that it must absolutely not stay? Why do you feel that the fact that Morrissey happens to have a similar title is a more noteworthy reference. The song has no other connection or relation to Spring Heeled Jack other than a vague similarity of name, the lyrics have nothing to do with the folklore of Spring Heeled Jack. At least with the Oblivion reference about the "Boots of Springheel Jak" the name is more similar, as well as the item granting great leaping abilities to the wearer, clearly this is more likely a actual reference to the folklore character Spring Heeled Jack.
Also, you have made no comment on why you are removing the references about the recent comic books featuring Spring Heeled Jack. This is even more clearly on topic with this article than either a Morrissey song or an item in a computer game. —Asatruer 15:44, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Doing a google search for "Boots of Springheel Jak" shows to me that this item exists in the game and confers similar abilities to the wearer. I vote to add its reference back into the article. Jeff schiller 17:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I actually have played through this game and can confirm that this item is in the game and there must be some root from this legend. The character in game is a vampire and has lived for hundreds of years, he was also a thief who was famed for his amazing jumping abilities, therefore I think the conclusion can be drawn that he is based off of this legend. Also I would like to point out that I only visited this page because of the similarity of the name. NE Xeroxed Soul (talk) 03:47, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

NPOV

I had brought this point up in the past, but nothing was done about it, so I finally took care of it myself. The claim that Spring Helled JAck was real and actually existed and attacked people and so forth is a POV. Writing the artilce in such a way that the claims and reports and stories and legends are presented as 100% factual was a MASSSIVE violation of WP:NPOV policy. I have gone through and reworded many sentences all over the article to go with the neutral and factual information that people reported this things, that they were alleged, and so forth. This was badly needed and long overdue.

If you have a problem with some of the versions of the new wording, feel free to edit to try to make it read more smoothly. Do not, however, try to change the wording back to claim that these events actually did not happen, because that is taking a position on a controversial topic, and encyclopedia articles simply do not do that.

No doubt other edits will be needed to make the NPOV even more readable... I know the skeptical position of the article read like it was written by a proponent of the paranormal view who wsa trying to make fun of the skeptics or didn;t understand what they are saying. DreamGuy 07:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Whilst I support the removal of some of the less notable pop-culture references I think that going through the article liberally adding allegedly everywhere is unnecessary. I refer you to Shauri's previous comments on this matter. The claim that SHJ was real is not POV, in fact no author who has researched SHJ has questioned his existence--what authors differ on is whether or not SHJ was a paranormal phenomenon. The article as it was made this distinction clear, reporting the different explanations on equal terms and allowing the reader to decide. JeremyA 04:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

You're simply wrong and ignorant... and I had hoped you'd given this up a year ago, but here you were recently trying to revert badly needed changes to the text to try to make it NPOV. Please go read some real research on the topic instead of parroting what the poor quality sources you are familiar with have said, and read the WP:NPOV policy while you are at it. DreamGuy 05:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

A Screenplay has been written by a couple of UK writers on Spring Heeled Jack and the synopsis can be found at: http://inktip.com/searchbywriterid2.php

Pop culture references

I have reverted the blanking of valid pop culture references by Victrix, as the content is valid, on-topic, verifiable and there is no consensus for its removal. Editors should also note that there is strong suspicion that DreamGuy and Victrix are the same person. --Centauri 02:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Pop culture references are not valid.89.243.3.185 19:53, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Protected

The article has now been protected to prevent this edit war from continuing as requested at WP:RfPP. Please work out your issues and reach a compromise. Once you believe that you have reached an agreement on the matter and protection is no longer necessary, please contact me or post a request for unprotection. Note that my protection of the current version is not an endorsement of the version; it merely got protected at whatever state it was at when I arrived. AmiDaniel (talk) 04:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to request that somebody please fix the Multiverse link (in the Paranormal conjectures section) to point to one of the actual multiverse pages (probably to Multiverse (science))rather than the disambiguation page. Could an admin take care of this, or anybody else once the page is unprotected? Thanks. --Mbell 22:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry + 3RR abuse

Further to my comments above it has now been established that DreamGuy and Victrix are indeed the same person. --Centauri 04:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Please take a look at the CheckUser scale of likelihood — Confirmed-Likely-Possible-Inconclusive-Unrelated — to avoid making erroneous claims. "Likely" does not rise to "established" — how could it, when the decision "confirmed" was also available to the CheckUser admin? If you want to invite admin action in this matter, please take it to WP:ANI, as I have already advised User:Englishrose.[1] It's better to get more eyes and an informed discussion, rather than posting your own idiosyncratic interpretation on talkpages as if it were uncontested fact. Bishonen | talk 14:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC).

Likely means just that - more likely than not. Your continued defense of DreamGuy/Victrix is puzzling to say the least. There is an extremely small possibility that they are not the same person, but all available evidence - and there is a LOT of it, extending over a LONG period of time strongly indicates otherwise. --Centauri 11:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Spelling

It's an article about a British topic, so "skeptical" should be spelt "sceptical". Any mods care to oblige? Thanks. —Wereon 19:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

No. English Wikipedia supports the use of both British English and American English, but not at the same time. An article should be written entirely in one dialect/whatever, and as it is already in American English, it should be left that way. Freedomlinux 03:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The appropriate guideline for this issue is Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English. Using the principle of "If there is a strong tie to a specific region/dialect, use that dialect" this article should use British English for this very British subject. --Allen3 ^talk 10:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Request unprotection?

I have seen no substantive discussion of the problems in the article in the last two weeks. Unless there is objection, I will request unprotection. Calwatch 23:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

There has been no discussion substantive or not so I agree, please do so if you have not done so already—Asatruer 14:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I have unprotected it. Please discuss controvertial changes here rather than edit waring. --JeremyA 01:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Could jack be active today Karzack 04:37, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, yes he could. It is very unlikly, because the last recorded sightings of him date back around two hundered years ago, but he still may be lurking around the streets somewhere. ~VNinja~ 01:18, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm very happy

Ok, so this might be kinda stupid to post this, buuuuuuut.... I used to be the only person who paid attention to this article for a while, after I archived the talk page, and a little while before. So I'm very glad that more people are talking on the talk page and helping out with this article... that is all. ~VNinja~ 22:32, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

...in Popular culture, revisited

I just restored the last bit of the Popular culture section again and an idea occurred to me about this section. I agree with the sentiment that the section is getting a little long, but I think it would be better to consider splitting the section off into its own article, something link Spring Heeled Jack in popular culture. Add the {{main|Spring Heeled Jack in popular culture}} template to the top of this articles Spring Heeled Jack in popular culture section followed by a paragraph or two summarizing the old section then move it to its own article. I am worried though that this might be too small just by itself, but it is an idea.
Anyone have any particular opinion on the matter?
—Asatruer 17:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's worth its own article. We just need to trim down the verbosity of this section, it looks too wordy anyway. Jeff schiller 20:44, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Asatruer's idea is an excellent one. It has proved impossible to stop users, particularly Elder Scrolls fans, adding material that has very little to do with Spring-heeled Jack; simply editing down the section on popular culture has not worked. Mikedash 21:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Folks love the "...in Pop culture" thing: it gives them a chance to contribute (which is, I think, really good for first-time editors). On the other hand, it can easily turn into fan service, or bloat to the point where it over-shadows the source article. I don't, however, think that agressive deletions is the best way to handle the issue-- which I suppose is a long-winded way of saying that I agree with Asatruer. To go even further, I think that a Spring Heeled Jack (Elder Scrolls) page would probably be in order, if there is some particular wealth of information about whatever that might be. I have no idea what it might refer to, but heck, make an article, Elder Scrolls fans. Be bold. -mordicai. 21:23, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I believe the 'Boots of Springheel Jak' are a clear reference to the subject of this article, and therefore should be included in this article. However, they only appear in a single quest, and there is little more to say about them other than what is already here, so the character in the game (who likewise mainly appears in that quest alone) doesn't really merit his own article. However, the Thieves' Guild page could be updated to give brief summaries of each of their quests - in that case, more information could be put there. Ygoloxelfer 17:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I added that the Marvel character Toad was likely inspired by Spring-heeled Jack, as he was a British character with a freakish appearance whose sole power originally was a boosted leaping ability. He was also created around the same time as the other characters mentioned. Please leave it be. If I can't find a direct quote from Lee or Kirby referencing SHJ I may delete it. Unsigned, but added by User:68.166.68.84

It really has to work the other way around. Find a reference from Lee or Kirby showing a direct link between SHJ and Toad, then add it - otherwise it's pure speculation, which has no place in an encycopedia. Mikedash 07:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I've seen quite a few articles that state so-and-so may have influenced so-and-so with no citation. No one from DC or the creator of Zorro explicitly state that SHJ influenced Batman or Zoro as far as I know, but it's in the article. I don't really care though. 68.166.68.84 14:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I see it has been tagged up as needing Spring Heeled Jacks in popular culture and I agree. However, these entries can be tricky. I've started a few that have worked and edited a few that have got deleted. The critical factor is setting the remit and policing it hard. The entry on Edgar Allan Poe in popular culture seems to be working OK because the editors are fairly much on the same page and suspect material is tagged or taken to the talk page (depending on how supect it is). You'd have to stay focused solidly on SHJ appearing as a fictional character as references to him, allusions (where unproven), etc. while cause the entry to start bloating with trivia and will run into trouble. So basically I think it is a good idea, it is required (things have clearly reached a crisis point where a split is needed - I've seen it happen on other entries) and it can be a viable standalone entry with care and attention. For starters the whole Zorro/Batman/Lone Ranger paragraph could go and I'd be worried about this "There is also a veiled reference to Jack in Tim Powers' novel, The Anubis Gates." (Emperor 21:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC))

As a sidenote a large proportion of the section has been removed in this edit [2] following this FA review [3] and while one could argue that it was a) premature b) misunderstanding what was said as this supports the section: "The popular culture could do with some trimming (it shows a lack of balance between the different elements at the very least), but, bearing in mind the subject, I would think a large amount of the article should be dedicated to it." it does show a separate section is needed. The fact that we have sources for him inspiring a number of comic characters and also being the eponymous character in other comics I'd suggest that it is important information worth keeping... somewhere. I do think a spearate entry will need heavy policing but it is doable. (Emperor 13:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC))

Yes, I said it needed trimming and balancing, not the obliteration of everything but penny dreadfuls. There was a large section explaining the plot of one book that I removed yesterday, but in my opinion most of the rest was valid though in need of a little rationalisation. A couple of examples of different uses with some explanation of the development of the character would be fine, especially if the bulk of this section is to appear in a separate article. Yomangani^talk 20:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm very unhappy

I'm looking for information on a siege weapon called a springhald, and I get redirected here >:( AllStarZ 03:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Spring heeled Jack versus Batman I remember reading a Batman story in an anthology celebrating a Batman anniversary (that also had a Black Widowers story by Isaac Asimov in it) where a student was possessed by SHJ after being cut by a razor that he had found after researching ripper crimes. SHJ was presented as some sort of God of the Razor who was conjectured to be the real cuplrit of the crimes of Jack the Ripper and other famous criminals, and lead to the student murdering several prostitutes around Gotham's tube system. Batman duly did battle and was only able to win when the moon was blocked by clouds during their final encounter, as this broke the link between the God and his host. The story was interesting for looking at how an obsession with urban legends ended up in making them come true, and also for testing Batman's belief in rational explanations for seemingly paranormal events. I can't remember who wrote it or what the anthology was called but if anyone out there knows it would be good to include it in the Popular Culture section. 89.242.221.68 18:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC) Lo

It was written by Joe Lansdale and appeared in the anthology 'New Tales of Batman' edited by Martin Greenberg, IIRC. Rhinoracer 08:03, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm very ambivalent

Footnotes are excellent to have, but they're an outdated kind. ;/

All right, this isn't a real complaint, just going along with a couple threads above. ;) CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 03:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Dates

In the History section: first para says first reports in December 1837; second para says "Later, in October 1837..." PiCo 07:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Should be clarified. First newspaper reports were Dec 37. First rumours, apparently Sep 37. Mikedash 08:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Recent case

It was removed but I spotted the news report earlier today [4] and it does have SHJ parallels. I'm unsure if it is worthy of inclusion here but the source is AP so is fairly legit as far as it goes [5]. (Emperor 00:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC))

You should also note that of the two links provided, it is the blog and not the news report that mentions SHJ. As the reliable source only mentions Batman and not SHJ, it is original research to imply that this was a new SHJ sighting. --Allen3 ^talk 04:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

That was, sort of, my point (or I'd have put it back in but with the source). When you look at the original report it is rather sketchy (although it is SHJ-like). I will keep an eye out for follow ups. Interesting that one of the most recent cases was called the "Houston Bat Man" though. (Emperor 05:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC))

This morning's news indicates that the event was an apparent hoax ("Student lied about Batman, school says", The Arizona Republic, February 16, 2007). --Allen3 ^talk 17:27, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Good find. I bet there will still be a couple of attempts to add it back in before it fades away (the follow up never makes as much of a splash as the initial report). (Emperor 17:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC))

Not related to Jumpin Jack Flash?

My edit to the article Jumpin Jack Flash (The Rolling Stones song) suggested a connection to or and inspiration from the Spring Healed Jack story. Another reverted my edit saying there was no connection. Maybe that peson was right. However, can others illiuminate this? The Rolling Stones were a London band, and certainly would have known about Spring Healed Jack. "Jumping" seems very close to someone using spring heals. "It's a gas, gas, gas" - could be a reference to the spitting of flames? And the weirdness of Spring Healed Jack certainly would fit the Stone's style. The cover of their single has some visual qeues that also may suggest Jumping Jack Flash. Your thoughts?Rockford1963 17:55, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Technically, your addition should have been removed because it lacks any sources to verify your claims. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia based that reports on existing scholarship and does not publish new ideas. If you wish to have the connection listed in either article then please locate and provide appropriate citations to show that there is more to your claims than simple speculation. --Allen3 ^talk 01:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

this subsection on this Talk page was not a complaint that my edit was removed. Thank you for the tutorial on Wikipedia. But back to the point of this subsection, which hopefully will stimulate discussion. Beyond mere speculation, there does seem to be a possibility of a connection between the song and the legend of the 1837 events. Hopefully there is someone that can answer either way.Rockford1963 02:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

It's a mess

This article really is the most dreadful mess. Normal for a WP article, terrible for something labeled a "Featured Article".

• Early reports: None of this is sourced, either to primary or to secondary sources.
• Official recognition:
  • The content of this long quotation could easily be boiled down into two to four sentences. It's "As quoted by Jacqueline Simpson, Spring-Heeled Jack (2001)". The list of "References" (apparently "ordered" at random, as in the first ever assignment by a very green undergrad) does show a leaflet. Copac doesn't list any such thing (searched for by author:Simpson and title:Jack). Amazon.co.uk does list a book cowritten by Simpson with Jack in its subtitle. Could the material also be somewhere in this? Isn't it published in a book or journal? And just where in the Times does Simpson say it comes from?
  • The long quotation starts off referring to people, plural, but within the very first sentence switches to one person. There's no comment on this, and no "[sic]".
    • PS I was too sleepy when I read it. Of course some upper-class twits (plural) are said to have bet another upper-class twit (singular) that the latter won't dare to do this and that. It does make sense. -- Morenoodles 07:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
• The legend spreads:
  • This was followed up (see Palmer's index to The Times).... Hell, no. The library I use is pretty good but lacks this. The authors of an FA should do the spadework themselves (though this phrase raises the suspicion that it was lifted uncritically from some secondary (tertiary, quadernary?) source that couldn't be bothered.
  • A report from Northamptonshire, in Hampshire,.... Was Northamptonshire in Hampshire back then? Well well.
  • Not sourced.
• The last reports:
  • Citations of 19th century papers of unspecified dates. Why not specify? Did the authors of this FA actually examine these things (or microfiches of them) themselves? Hard to believe -- and if they didn't, where are the secondary sources? If the secondary sources don't give the details (date, page), tell us they don't: then I for one will know for sure what I already suspect, that the secondary sources are sloppy.
  • No source for the Aldershot incident.
  • No source for the Newport Arch incident.
  • Or the Everton one.
  • Or the Houston one.
  • The Herefordshire one is sourced. Or rather, a botched attempt has been made to source it. It comes from this web page in which somebody says that in 1997 he was contacted by some gent who'd claimed he'd had this experience more than a decade previously. Oh, sorry, this isn't just "somebody"; the site's top page informs us that Each week in Highlander Web Magazine, Haunted Scotland brings you stories of Ghosts, UFO's, Castles, Sightings and Strange Phenomina [sic] reported throughout Scotland.... The editors of Britannica must be quivering in terror at this demonstration of scholarly rigor in an article "featured" by its main rival!
• Sceptical positions:
  • This idea matches the contents of the letter to the Lord Mayor, which accused a group of young aristocrats as the culprits, after an irresponsible wager. Actually it matches the first part of the first sentence of that garbled letter: thereafter, the letter was about a singular miscreant. (I say garbled, because the writer says "durst not" where they clearly mean "durst", etc.)
    • It's my head that was garbled when reading the passage the first time. Morenoodles 06:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • "Some sceptics", "other researchers", etc.: name them.
  • Brewer is well known; some of his books are easy to locate in libraries of moderate size. So why not specify where he made his comment?
• Paranormal conjectures:
  • "Supporters of this theory": name them.
  • "A visitor from another dimension": name anybody who believes this gibberish, aside from the one person who's linked to, and whose fragrant musings on that very page include such nuggets as: Back in the 1980's [sic] I read John Keel's The Mothman Prophecies. I have to say that this really strange book actually kept me up at night with the implications of the strange things that actually COULD be "out there" and about which we knew very little. / I recently read a bumper sticker that said: "if you are not outraged, you aren't paying attention." Well, I would like to amend that to "If you are not AMAZED, you aren't paying attention!" There are things going on here on the Big Blue Marble that are just perfectly astounding! Oh, right, and perhaps preteens, the senile, etc.
  • The German springy devices: A note seems to imply that this info is sourced. It isn't: the link leads to a moderately interesting page on SHJ whose comment on the devices reads in full: Quick fun fact: During the first World War, the Germans tried to build spring-loaded shoes to help soldiers move faster. Initial testing resulted in an 85% rate of men breaking both their ankles and limping for the rest of their lives. And this in turn isn't sourced. If this matter is important, where's the credible source?
• In popular culture:
  • Why the hell cite some obscure pamphlet in order to cite the OED (which, being a dictionary, doesn't usually "recount" anything)? Look in the OED. Incidentally, I've just taken a quick look myself in the 2nd (1989) edition of the OED. Between the entries for "spring-headed" and "springily" there is: Nothing. Just where is this within the OED?
  • Compare: (i) Almost from the moment the first incidents gained public knowledge, he turned into a successful fictional character, becoming the protagonist of many penny dreadfuls from 1840 to 1904. ... // (ii) A play by John Thomas Haines, in 1840, Spring-Heeled Jack, the Terror of London, ... Later that decade, Spring Heeled Jack's first penny dreadful appearance came... So within the space of a few lines his first appearance as a protagonist of a penny dreadful has moved from 1840 to later in the 1840s. The "moment" was no later than a few days after the Lord Mayor's presentation (9 Jan '38); "Almost from the moment" here seems to mean two years or more later. Or have I misunderstood?

All the best revising this thing! -- Morenoodles 05:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

All very good points. I hope you will contribute to the article to fix at least soe of those problems you name. DreamGuy 06:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

A very few, maybe. I don't have access to all that much in the way of materials about popular myths and hysteria epidemiology, let alone books about "the paranormal". Morenoodles 07:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

NPOV - a continual problem here

I don't know how many times I've tried to explain this to people over the history of this article and others like it, but here we go again:

Wikipedia follows what is called WP:NPOV policy. In a nutshell, that means the articles do not take sides when there is dispute over facts. The idea that there really WAS someone running around attacking people is an opinion, it's not proven, and the article itself states that sources argue that the whole thing was hysteria. We also know from other similar cases that people make false reports, injure themselves, and blame accidental injuries on the object of the hysteria, all without it ever really having happened. So saying that these people WERE attacked or that there WAS a man doing this, etc. is wholly and completely stating an opinion.

The proper way to cite these things in an article is that when we report what someone claimed, we say who said it it, what they said, and cite a source. We do not phrase things in such a way to imply or state straight out that what they said was true. Period.

Even some very minor and badly-needed changes to get the article more into NPOV guidelines were quite quickly reverted by an overzealous editor. I should also point out that Mike Dash has made a number of edits to this article, and he is an author who has a very specific point of view, and one that is not accepted by all sources. User:DreamGuy 06:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

An additional problem, I think, is that most of what's said (plausible or implausible) is not sourced, or sourced very lazily and vaguely. See my charge-sheet in the preceding section.

the article itself states that sources argue that the whole thing was hysteria Yes indeed, but it doesn't seem to name them. Rather, it says that this or that book says that some unnamed sources argue this. Strange, in that there's a considerable literature about mass hysteria, going back at least as far as Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. The article seems happier to cite apparently junky web pages that uncritically recycle old stories. Morenoodles 06:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't know who the anonymous editor who posted about me above is, but I should point out that while I did leave a long list of the factual problems with the article on the talk page about a year ago, I've made no substantial edits to the tone or the content of the piece since, just a few small corrections of the more glaring idiocies. As it stands, this article very far from reflects my point of view and frankly I agree that it is far, very far, from being FA standard. If I sat down and made a list of every fact thats wrong and every interpretation that's iffy or utterly unfounded, though, I'd be writing another 2,500 words on top of the 2,500 words of points I made a year ago, nearly half of which never actually got addressed.

If it did, in fact, reflect my point of view, incidentally, would that be such a bad thing? I'm the only person who has ever devoted serious time to proper, detailed historical study of the problem going back to original sources, and to be blunt my perspective on the subject should be of more value than that of some anonymous editor who's only ever read a couple of inaccurate web sites on the topic. Of course on Wikipedia no one's opinion is more valuable than anyone else's, and that - as is frequently observed - is why specialists of all stripes are often reluctant to contribute and why people like me, who have a quarter of a century's worth of proper, referenced research to hand that could be poured into constructing an accurate account, won't bother because the pain of endlessly defending the resultant article against interpolations by know-nothings just isn't worth it.

I don't mean this to sound elitist, I would like nothing better than to debate topics that interest me with people who have studied the same material and hold opposing views. That's very different, though, to trying to debate with those who uncritically accept wildly inaccurate secondary sources as gospel. Mikedash 13:33, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Mike Dash wrote: "If it did, in fact, reflect my point of view, incidentally, would that be such a bad thing?" Yes. We are not here to endorse anyone's point of view. And the fact that you could even ask that shows a complete lack of understanding of some of the most important guiding principles here, not to mention an overinflated ego.

And I also think it's ridiculous for you to try to claim that anyone who doesn't accept your opinion is "uncritically accepting wildly inaccurate secondary sources as gospel" -- quite the contrary in this case.

Your active participation here is arguably a violation of several important policies, such as not presenting original research, not pushing biased opinions, conflict of interest and so forth and so on.

To put it bluntly, to be more historically based than Peter Haining and most Fortean Times magazine writers really is not saying much. You have uncritically accepted that these events really happened, and completely missed pre-existing folklore and hysteria which indicates strongly that this was all just another urban legend making the rounds. Most of the alleged features of the alleged Spring Heeled Jack character were already well publicized the century before, and also present in the legends about various devil creatures the centuries before that. DreamGuy 05:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Arrogant? What about your attitude that no one who's ever written for Fortean Times can possibly be a competent scholar, or that anyone who's bothered to actually do primary research is incapable of writing neutrally? And you need to read the Wiki policies on original research again. There's certainly nothing preventing original historical research being presented, so long as full, checkable sources are cited. The OR policy is designed to prevent posting of uncheckable material.Mikedash 08:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't say that at all, do not put words into my mouth. I've seen many, many examples of that magazine, and I can tell you that the MAJORITY of the writers are totally incompetent when it comes to legitimate research and is instead just wildly speculative and unsupported fluff. You were trying to argue that you were one of the more scholarly one s there, I pointed out that that's not saying you are scholarly. The OR policy does not allow people to do a run around of the policy by putting the info they want up on the article onto their website and then go put it onto the article. It has to still come from reliable sources, which is not a personal website. And we are dealing with multiple things here... I do not dispute your right to think that people should be able to cite your writing that was published by other sources, but you cannot turn this encyclopedia into a mouthpiece for your own views, which is what you keep saying you think would be a good thing. DreamGuy 11:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Dreamguy writes: Mike Dash wrote: "If it did, in fact, reflect my point of view, incidentally, would that be such a bad thing?" Yes. No. There's nothing inherently wrong with the reflecting of any particular point of view.

Dreamguy continues: We are not here to endorse anyone's point of view. Agreed. And the fact that you could even ask that shows a complete lack of understanding of some of the most important guiding principles here, not to mention well, let's not mention it. No it doesn't show this. Please consider the differences between "reflect" (in part), "reflect as a whole", and "endorse". And please hesitate before accusing anybody of a complete lack of understanding of this or that.

Dreamguy also writes: Your active participation here is arguably a violation of several important policies, such as not presenting original research.... On this, do please see WP:OR#Citing_oneself, which explicitly allows self-citation.

The matter of who created the "sources" aside, let's consider their reliability: Any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged must be accompanied by a reliable source. [...] In general, the most reliable sources are books and journals published by university presses; mainstream newspapers; and magazines and journals published by known publishing houses. "University presses" seems tight; I'll take Erlbaum, Blackwell, FSG, McGraw-Hill, Wiley, Springer, etc. "Known" seems loose; I'll take "reputable". What's clear is that most of the sources for this article appear to be shoddy. (As for Smith's work, it may be excellent for all I know. But if it is excellent, I wonder why it hasn't been published in a peer-reviewed journal. Not that anything else here seems to have been.) Morenoodles 08:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

"Dreamguy writes: Mike Dash wrote: "If it did, in fact, reflect my point of view, incidentally, would that be such a bad thing?" Yes. No. There's nothing inherently wrong with the reflecting of any particular point of view." Other than freaking WP:NPOV policy, which forbids the article from taking a POV, and which is considered one of the foundations of this entire project. He was asking if the article could represent his view, not if it could be mentioned as one view on the page. Please try to follow the arguments, because it sounds like you are actively encouraging him to take ownership of the article. DreamGuy

Stuff about popular hysteria and folklore has been published by university presses. For example, I have a copy of a (peculiarly macabre) book about belief in vampires published by Yale UP. Little stuff about "the paranormal" is published by university presses, because -- well, I should try to avoid starting a flamewar.

I have no knowledge of SHJ. I came to the article as a reader. As a reader, I started by being interested, ended up appalled. I was more amazed to see that it was an FA. I've tried to improve the article; if I've failed (whether or not because of complete ignorance), I'll happily bow out. (My own hunch is that ignorance needn't hinder editing as long as the editors are acutely aware of their ignorance; however, this may just be self-serving.) Morenoodles 09:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

All fair points, moonnoodles, thank you. (Though good luck finding a university press publishing on this subject.) Can I just say, though... at no point have I ever sought to impose my point of view on this article. What I actually did was post a long list of factual inaccuracies, with sources cited to show why they were inaccurate, and left other people to get on with making the changes they saw fit. Please be clear: this is not my article, it does not reflect my views, which I'm perfectly happy to express solely in my own publications. What I was trying to say (perhaps not clearly enough) is that all articles are better written by people who have accumulated detailed knowledge of the subject than people who have none. If that's a controversial position to take on Wikipedia then the project really is in trouble Mikedash 08:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

"all articles are better written by people who have accumulated detailed knowledge of the subject than people who have none. If that's a controversial position to take on Wikipedia then the project really is in trouble" No, the controversial part is you trying to claim by suggesting that it would be a good thing if your views took over the article that anyone who disagrees with you has no knowledge of the topic. Would you stop pretending like you are the only one in the world who has ever written anything of any scholarly value that would impact this article? You keep talking about ignorant people -- yes, some ignorant people did edit the page -- but you are responding to me and my concerns on making sure this article follows the NPOV policy, and I can assure you that I am not at all ignorant about Spring Heeled Jack and other mass hysteria. And if you are one of the people who insists (as some who have edited did) that these attacks were really real, and did happen, and are proven history, then you are the one ignorant of alternate theories. DreamGuy 11:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

If you bothered to actually read my paper on this subject (something you seem not to have done despite the fact that it is freely available on the web) you'd know I far from uncritically cite these things as "real attacks". It contains an extended disussion of the evidence, citing witnesses who challenged the perceptions of those who claimed to have seen "Jack" or been attacked. The paper actually concludes that the scare almost entirely the product of what you refer to as mass hysteria, and that any attacks that were "real" were perpetrated by hoaxers or jokers, not some bizarre alien. Hardly a paranormalist position. And while it certainly is posted on a personal website, it's also fully footnoted and referenced so anyone can go and check the statements it contains. More than that, the original paper in Fortean Studies actually contained a full "Calendar of Sources" transcribing, in its entirety, every single contemporary newspaper article then known that refers to this subject, so those with an interest can check not just my sources, but the context for the quotes I use. How much more objective do you think I should be? Scholarly? By any normally accepted standards (not just those of Fortean Times) I'm scholarly enough - degree in history from Cambridge, PhD in history from Kings College London (all matters of public record, feel free to check). That doesn't necessarily mean everything I write is scholarly, but it does mean I know what scholarship is and how to write in a scholarly way. And as for you being "not at all ignorant about Spring-heeled Jack", really? What sources have you read or consulted, exactly? (Hard to know what they could be, since mine is the only detailed, fully referenced one out there - something I'd far rather wasn't actually the case.) How many months spent in the British Newspaper Library checking back to the original material? How long in the National Archives searching contemporary police records? How many hundreds of letters written seeking additional information? Finally, how many times do I need to repeat that I'm not trying to "take ownership" of the article? If I was, I'd have rewritten it long ago. Mikedash 11:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

DreamGuy, a suggestion. Use bold very sparingly. And a question, primarily but not exclusively for DreamGuy. Please forget about both User:Mikedash and Mike Dash for a moment. So, Mike Dash aside, which secondary/tertiary sources cited in this article do you regard as having been compiled with sufficient rigor to be worth citing in an encyclopedia article?

Do you have access to, or know of the existence of, any secondary sources that likely to be more scrupulous?

(As for me, I haven't seen any of the printed material. I have glanced at, but haven't read, Mike Dash's long web page -- but anyway we're putting him aside for a moment. The titles and publishers of most of the secondary materials look highly suspect to me. As I've said, I am a complete ignoramus in these matters; however, I think I have a slop detector that may not be entirely useless.) -- Morenoodles 07:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The simple problem in this entire affair is that not much has been written about Spring-heeled Jack for a good period of time (if anyone has firm [or even not-so-firm] evidence to the contrary, I implore them to make it public here). As such, the best, "unquestionable" sources for the material rest in newspapers and similar materials dating back well over 100 years. Anyone want to go to England to find them? --Chr.K. 15:07, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Rubbishy sources

A lot of the "references" for this article have titles that suggest to me they're moderately entertaining junk, the kind of thing that my granny would give me when I was eleven or so. Nothing wrong with that kind of book for preteen and teen reading; as "sources" for an encyclopedia article, they're crap.

Or they're crap if they are as bad as I think -- I haven't seen them. Looks like they're crap for others, too. Here's the SGML comment on Haining's book: a rather colourful book that provides many of the more sensational details and the most fantastic theories, but lacking of a serious investigation of the events.

I'm edging closer to a conviction that 90% of this article should be deleted. As an FA, it's a disgrace (though it is pretty, and makes for easy reading). Morenoodles 09:23, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

The vast majority of the sources here fall far short of meeting Wikipedia's policy on reliability, yes. DreamGuy 06:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Sadly the papers of the time are of questionable value as they tended to sensationalize events and even make things up. However they are the best thing we have to showing that Spring Heeled Jack had something about him.--BruceGrubb 12:33, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Paper and web

Dreamguy undid some of my work with the edit comment: it's a very bad idea to mix further reading with external links, leads to duplicates, spam sneaking in, linkfarming and confused edts

I find this very odd. But perhaps I misunderstand. I'm primarily interested in detailed information on the sources used for the article, not in "further reading" whether of paper or web pages. People would see "Haining" and then look up "Haining" within a single list, not in one list and, if it doesn't appear there, within a second list. Thus I propose a section titled either "Sources" or "References". This section might be supplemented with another on further reading. Anything appearing under "Sources" or "References" that isn't actually a source or reference for what's in this article would be automatically zapped, no matter how interesting it might be. Any spamming of the additional list would of course be reverted too.

(An additional problem is that discussed in the previous section: that the sources/references are feeble.) -- Morenoodles 07:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding how things are typically done on Wikipedia, the Notes section shouldn't be notes with full on explanations and thinks separated from the article, it should be references... and directly name reliable sources for which the info in the article came from. There really shouldn't, technically and ideally, be any further reading, because if it's worth reading it's worth citing as a reference. Then the external links should be web resources. If you mix the web links into references then people are going to treat it as external links and start adding links, and then people won't know what is just spam and what things were actually used for references in the article, making cleaning up a nightmare. DreamGuy 11:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't fully understand, but I think I get the general thrust of what you're saying and I'd be happy to find common ground. With that in mind, here's a suggestion. Since "There really shouldn't, technically and ideally, be any further reading," would it be OK to cut any "external link" that isn't directly cited? If so, we can retitle the lists (your preference) or list (mine) accordingly. Whether there should be one list or two is something we can get to later. How about it? Morenoodles 06:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

No, as a general principle who shouldn't just remove "external links" that aren't directly cited, we should remove the "further reading" ones that aren't (and the ones that are should be fully cites bibliographical format in the cite so they do not have to be listed again). And, ideally, that might end up also not having any external links as they could all be cited in the body somewhere. DreamGuy 12:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Material that I've deleted

Incoherent trivia here for some time

In the centre of Linby village, just outside Nottingham, Spring Heeled Jack is referenced on a Linby public service map printed by Ordnance Survey, opposite the Horse and Groom public house. A map describes the local area and the many stories and myths surrounding the village. The exact comment regarding Spring Heeled Jack is: "Spring Heeled Jack, in the months of winter, Spring Heeled Jacks footprints are left in the snow along the route of Quarry Lane." Quarry Lane runs for about 3 quarters of a mile until on the map stated as only "[a] site of scientific interest": a large enclosed forested area bordering the grounds of Newstead Abbey, known locally as "Devils wood."

So far as I can understand this, it's mere trivia. Others may disagree. Morenoodles 06:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Newly added trivia

In May of 2007 Dragon Magazine presented a new Dungeons and Dragons monster named a Springheel. This evil urban fey is based off of the Spring Heeled Jack legends. It has the ability to breath fire and jump great distance in a manner similar to Spring Heel Jack. It is an urban fey to show the London origins of the legend.

In the game Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, the magical item Boots of Springheel Jak allows the player to leap to great heights. Despite the variant spelling, this game item is an obvious reference to Spring Heeled Jack.

I don't know; maybe this article should cater for twelve-year-olds. Your call. Morenoodles 06:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I've removed that nonsense over and over, but there's a pretty dedicated individual who doesn't understand the basics of what an encyclopedia is for who insists on putting that nonnotable fictioncruft trivia back. DreamGuy 12:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

In terms of fiction, why is everything after the early 20th century considered irrelevant to mention? That makes no sense. --Scottandrewhutchins 17:35, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, WP:RECENT, for one. Old items we still remember have withstood the test of time. Pocket Monsters? Pppptttbbltttt. That hasn't even withstood the test of our time, as only kids know anything about it, and it's an extremely minor and piddling reference within that obscure unrelated topic to begin with. DreamGuy 18:17, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I hardly think over 3 million copies sold so far is a "piddle." -Sardaukar Blackfang 18:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

More trivia

(a theory that has been incorporated into the RPG Feng Shui)

This tells us nothing about who subscribes to this daft "theory". Morenoodles 09:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

"source" for the German army thing

"The Triangle - Sci-Fi." Spring Heeled Jack: profitable, unbelievable. Accessed on March 25 2005.

An article from a student newspaper at Drexel University. Nothing necessarily wrong with that, particularly as the author is "a senior majoring in materials science and engineering", but it's pretty dodgy: he's an undergrad (though one who writes remarkably well). No, what kills this is that all he says on the issue here is Quick fun fact: During the first World War, the Germans tried to build spring-loaded shoes to help soldiers move faster. Initial testing resulted in an 85% rate of men breaking both their ankles and limping for the rest of their lives. He doesn't present any evidence that pushers of this "paranormal" line claim that this is what the Germans tried and failed to do (whether or not the Germans actually tried and failed to do it). Morenoodles 09:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

According to Mike Dash's paper, the earliest source for this assertion is J. Vyner, "The Mystery of Springheel Jack" in Flying Saucer Review, Vol7 No3, May-June 1961. In the absence of truly contemporary confirmation, one wonders whether this is really encyclopaedic. Ghughesarch (talk) 13:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Game

The PC and console-based RPG game The Elder Scrolls IV:Oblivion features a quest which requires a thief get and use the "Boots of Springheel Jak", allowing the player to jump to great heights, avoiding the militia guards. The boots are destroyed in the process of the quest.

Seems trivial to me. Morenoodles 08:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Come to think of it, most of these fiction references were all ones I removed in the past but inexplicably and for no encyclopedic reason kept getting added back. I of course agree with their being deleted again and hope to finally make it stick. DreamGuy 12:24, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Please don't delete

I am convinced my theory is the correct one, but it was deleted again. I know you think it is a "wild idea", but i feel it covers every part of Jack's physical form. The theory, for those of you who don't know, was that springheel jack was some class of human with a jetpack. His egg-shaped helmet is something one would wear to protect his head. His red eyes are goggles to protect his eyes. His "claw hands" are the metallic controls for his device. The oilskin he is wearing were probably fireproof clothing, as one would expect an operator of a jetpack to have. His breathing of blue flames could be explained by the exhaust flames of such a device. People might have confused it with him "spitting fire". And of course this explains his ability to leap to great heights. I feel this is a much more plausible theory, but his origins, or the origins of his jetpack, are obviously unknown to me. Thank you.-padddy5

See Wikipedia:No original research. If you want your opinions to not be deleted you'd be better off getting a blog of your own and not try to add them to an encyclopedia DreamGuy 19:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

"Paranormal Conjectures"

In this section, an uncited claim was made.

• A demon, accidentally or purposefully summoned into this world by practitioners of the occult or who made himself manifest simply to create spiritual turmoil.

The "reference" is as follows:

• Supporters of this theory include John Keel author of the The Mothman Prophecies) and Jacques Vallée

You can't just reference another uncited claim. You have to cite some sort of documentation that these people support these theories. Did Keel mention it in one of his writings? Tell us which one. Concede that he supports the theory in an interview? Tell us when and where. You've got to give us something. Anyways, I was bold and deleted it. 98.197.139.224 07:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Upon further inspection, I've decided to remove the entire section.

• I would concede to adding the extraterrestrial bit back in, if the citation is formatted properly.
• As for the other-dimension bit, it's gotta go. Knight-Jadczyk has the same bad habit as some of the editors of this page: she relays debatable information as if it were fact, and she DOES NOT CITE HER SOURCES. Most importantly, however, is that the "Wave" site, as interesting as it may seem, is nothing more than a blog. 98.197.139.224 07:56, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Popular culture references

I added a comment to the end of this section to try to restrain further listiness. Time will tell if it is successful. — BillC ^talk 21:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

The Tim Powers book, The Anubis Gates, has some of the central characters wearing spring-soled shoes (Dr Romany / Romanelli). I don't know whether this is intentional on Powers' part, but his drawing on other contemporaneous sources of paranormal occurrences would support this. zzyss (talk) 05:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Refs and secondary refs

A recent edit put "Fortean Studies volume 3" (1996) as a source for several claims of fact, and then in each case it was to say what that publication claimed a period newspaper said. I Googled the name and found an ISBN for that title, but when I tried to use our Book resources page for ISBNs through WorldCat it said it didn't exist in any library. Google books says it does exist but gave no info. What kind of publication is this? It sounds like it might not meet WP:RS guidelines. More importantly, if there are original news articles being quoted, shouldn't we check the originals if at all possible and cite those? I know a lot of those old publications are online here and there. DreamGuy 22:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Fortean Studies was an annual book filled with long footnoted papers, of the sort not suitable to appear in the more popular main magazine, that was published by Fortean Times 1994-2000. It was not a refereed academic journal. Total print run for FS3 was 2,500 copies and there is a copy in the British Library, call no. ZC.9.a.4396

With regard to checking citations, the Times is available online via Gale, which is accessible only through participating libraries, not to home users. The Illustrated Police News is one of the titles digitised for the 'British Newspapetrs 1800-1900' British Library digitisation project, which will become available via British academic libraries only from the early new year. Other titles could be checked manually in the British Newspaper Library at Colindale although, I assure you, the transcripts presented in FS 3 were carefully made and are extremely accurate.

I should note that some of the statements in the article that have now been footnoted are not born out at all in the sources referred to. There is nothing in the News of the World for 1904 about SHJ laughing manically or leaping over houses. Nor is there anything in the Illustrated Police News about SHJ being struck by bullets and making a noise like something hitting an empty bucket. These are errors that have been present in the article for over 2 years See the detailed list of errors posted in September 2005 in the archive section to this page. Mikedash 16:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Melon head man

I've read a lot of Spring-Heeled Jack articles, the guy with the skin-tight black outfit, flaming eyes, etc. But in those they also talk about a man with a melon-shaped head () type with white overalls who was spotted hopping across river banks anyone know what the heck is with that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.237.44.54 (talk) 00:49, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Kolchak the Night Stalker

There was an episode of the show where Kolchak was trying to track down Jack the Ripper, still alive in the 1970s. They amalgamated the Ripper with the Spring Heeled Jack mythos in that he was able to evade police by making very high, bouncing leaps and was impervious to their gunfire. Neoyamaneko (talk) 04:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:StFrancisXavier3.JPG

Image:StFrancisXavier3.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Redirected from Springald

Can anyone tell me why Springald is redirected here? The whole article showed no such name other than the ref section containing the word in which it is the origin of Spring Heeled Jack? Shouldn;t it be mentioned in the article if it is such the case? MythSearcher^talk 18:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Descriptions of reference works

Updated in line with suggestions by Dreamguy and Allen3.Mikedash (talk) 07:51, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Footnote 5 has an "op cit" which seems out of place. Could someone fix this? 62.25.106.209 (talk) 12:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

"Alien"?

Grouping: Hoax/Mass hysteria/ Demon/Phantom/Alien

What exactly makes Springheel Jack qualify for 'alien'? --RyanTee82 (talk) 03:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

springheeled jack has shown highly possible likelyness to other well known charectors such as jack the ripper. Im trying to say could it have been a series of unique sociopath that had used this legacy as some kind of diversion to there identity. but im not saying there couldnt be some kind of otherworldly demon or demons going around slapping men and undressing women but just trying to place a point of view. o' and the account of him spitting flames could have just been a joke i mean some drunk asks a girl to get a light knowing when she retuned with a candle he would just scare her by spitting liqure into the open flame.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ironmonster (talk • contribs) 18:20, September 21, 2009 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:No original research for the Wikipedia policy that blocks such speculative possibilities from being added as part of a Wikipedia article. --Allen3 ^talk 18:31, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Ironmonster (talk) 19:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC) Ironmonster (talk) 19:03, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Springheeled Jock

Springheeled Jock was a superhero in Grant Morrision's Zenith Phase III. I'm not sure if that meets notability, but it is something I keep meaning to add to the page. MartinSFSA (talk) 04:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Awkard, maybe plagiarized, wording

"Every effort was made by the police to discover the author of these and similar outrages, and several persons were questioned, but were set free." I have a suspicion that even though this sentence is cited, it's not a true paraphrase. No one writes like this in the 21st century. Might want to check Burke, pp. 27-28, to see if it's plagiarized. -65.30.183.17 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Good call in my opinion. The pages are a little different but here is the Scales account which has the paragraph. The Alsop account is here. What do other editors think?
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 03:01, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Fighting the Nazis in WW2?

"Pérák, like Spring-heeled Jack, went on to become a folklore hero, even starring in several animated superhero cartoons, fighting the SS."

So ... I know that Wiki will let anyone write anything, regardless of lack of sources or how outrageous the claim might be, but the idea that during the height of WW2 in Czechoslovakia someone was making anti-Nazi cartoons, during the German occupation of Czechoslovakia with its terrible repression, I'd just like some cited information before agreeing this isn't just a flight of fancy. Chalchiuhtlatonal (talk) 01:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Animated cartoons, so probably post-war. The entry does not give any dates or details for these cartoons. 82.33.48.80 (talk) 00:13, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Animated films were made as early as 1906. It does not specifically date the films to the post-war era. A citation is still required. 12.233.147.42 (talk) 00:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

In popular culture.

I do not think myself fit to write on Wikipedia, but someone else might note the appearance of Springheel Jack in the latest Elder Scrolls-game? It's called The Elder Scrolls IV : Oblivion, and if I remember correctly you are asked by The Thieves Guild to obtain the boots of Springheel Jack. I also remember that you get his diary as well, and this I'm not at all sure of but there is a possibility that you also meet him.

As I said, I can't really write here but surely there is someone else who has played this widely popular game?

'Springheel' Jak was a famous thief who lived 300 years earlier in Oblivion. In his diary he discusses becoming a vampire. Upon going out of his tomb he fights you. You must kill him and take the 'boots of Springheel Jak' back to the Gray Fox during a thieves guild quest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.137.153.156 (talk) 02:42, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

As he's the titular character in the steampunk novel, Burton & Swinburne in The Strange Affair of Spring-Heeled Jack (Mark Hodder, Pyr, 2010, http://www.pyrsf.com/StrangeAffair.html), I think that merits a mention. Anyone want to second that and add it to the list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.154.224 (talk) 22:27, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

On the science fiction TV series Sanctuary, Spring-heeled Jack is a creature classified as an "Adnormal" (a term for any powerful being that is not human I believe) who has a dark bluish grey skinned demonic appearance and is capable of leaping great distances. He is credited as responsible for the "Jack the Ripper" murders in London. His reasoning for committing the murders is because he claims that London is his rightful home and the humans had been hunting him like a dog, thus he had decided to wage his own war against the humans, using his jumping abilities to evade capture. 173.180.204.18 (talk) 00:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

They are called "abnormals" in Sanctuary. FYI, Spring-heeled Jack featured prominently in the 3rd episode of the 5th series of the ITV/BBC America series Primeval. Doconeill (talk) 19:57, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Should we mention Primeval in this article? Visokor (talk) 19:33, 1 July 2012 (UTC) I was going to mention Primeval bu it looks as though you beat me to it! Spring-heeled Jack is mentioned in Series 5 episode 3 (as Spring Heel Jack) - see Chorocojo (talk) 22:55, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Done EvergreenFir (talk) 01:00, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2016

I would like to suggest an addition to the music section of this article. There is a song called Spring-Heeled-Jim on Morrissey's 1994 album, Vauxhall and I.

86.164.52.7 (talk) 14:19, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 16:14, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 March 2017

In the section After 1950, under Literature, add a reference to The Strange Affair of Spring Heeled Jack by Mark Hodder. Nelswadycki (talk) 21:04, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Not done: One is already there, at the end of the sentence. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:59, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Spring-heeled Jack. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110619222642/http://www.mikedash.com/extras/forteana/shj-about to http://www.mikedash.com/extras/forteana/shj-about
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160110133711/http://www.dionysos.org.uk/SHJ1.html to http://www.dionysos.org.uk/SHJ1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:02, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Through 1950 Suggestion

'Through', meaning before or prior to a time or amount, isn't a term that's generally used in the UK. Should it be changed to something more in keeping with the rest of the UK based information in this article? I'd suggest "Up to 1950", "Prior to 1950" or, to match the following section title, "Before 1950". MarpoHarks (talk) 10:36, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Can someone please add to the literature section, that Springheel Jack was also the subject in the book "The Further Adventures of Batman". The title of the story in the book is ’Subway Jack’ it goes into a lot of detail about the stories and myth that surrounds it.216.81.94.71 (talk) 17:01, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

After 1950, Literature

May be worth adding a line mentioning that Jack seems to have served as inspiration for Jack Half-a-Prayer of China Mieville's Bas-Lag series. 80.0.27.240 (talk) 12:16, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit requests on 4 February 2019

Early reports

The anecdote of Mary Stevens and the event of Spring-heeled Jack jumping in front of a carriage and both a 1928 novel about highwaymen by Elizabeth Villiers (the pseudonym of Isobel Mary Thorne) called Stand and Deliver: The Romantic Adventures of Certain Gentleman of the High Toby, Their TImes, Their Associates, Friends and Victims. However, as author John Matthews discusses this event in his book The Mystery of Spring-Heeled Jack: From Victorian Legend to Steampunk Hero, he asserts it is unlikely these events actually occurred. Given Villiers’ account was written 90 years after the alleged incident and has no contemporary sources, I would suggest these anecdotes be moved to “In popular culture” section.

Official recognition

“Another correspondent claimed that in Stockwell, Brixton, Camberwell and Vauxhall several people had died of fright and others had had fits;” “meanwhile, another reported that the trickster had been repeatedly seen in Lewisham and Blackheath.” His appearance in Lewisham was reported on December 30, 1837 by The Northampton Mercury and in that article he is given the moniker “Steel Jack”. J. S. Mackley notes this was possibly from previous reports which claimed he wore armour. As this report chronically occurred earlier, I suggest its mention be placed at the beginning of this section.

The claim that Spring-heeled Jack was seen in Blackheath seems to be based on the erroneous report of Polly Adams which has no contemporary sources. The earliest mention of her and Jack being tied to Blackheath is by Peter Haining in his 1977 work The Legend and Bizarre Crimes of Spring Heeled Jack. I suggest this location be removed from the article.

“The police were instructed to search for the individual responsible, and rewards were offered.” Nothing in the articles written about the Lord Mayor or the attacks indicate a reward being offered or for the police pursue the assailant beyond the call of duty. As Mackley notes: “Karl Bell comments on the Victorian justice system, noting that ‘merely frightening someone, even to the point of mental imbalance, appears to have been treated as an immoral prank by a cowardly man against a defenceless woman’.” As no rape or robbery occurred, it is unlikely a reward would have been offered up.

The Scales and Alsop reports

“The press coverage of these two attacks helped to raise the profile of Spring-heeled Jack.” Mackley suggests the opposite, that considering Jane Alsop specifically calls “We have caught Spring-Heeled Jack” that his notoriety was already widespread throughout the region, likely through word-of-mouth.

The legend spreads

“Most of the other accounts were written long after the date; contemporary newspapers do not mention them” This may be referencing the above tales by Villiers and Haining which insist the events of Mary Stevens and Polly Adams occurred amid the 1838 attacks but were first recorded in 1928 and 1977 respectively.

“The legend was linked with the phenomenon of the "Devil's Footprints" which appeared in Devon in February 1855” Mike Dash did extensively research on the Devil’s Footprints and included contemporary source materials on the subject, none of which make any allusion to Spring-heeled Jack. I suggest this sentence be removed.

References

A more complete citation of the third reference is: John Middleton, "Gregorian Ghosts: An Aristocratic Spectre", History Today vol. 61, no. 2 (February 2011) available here: https://www.historytoday.com/jacob-middleton/georgian-ghosts-aristocratic-spectre — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devin.dion3 (talk • contribs) 12:49, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

References

Adding Dishonored to the popular culture section

Dishonored is a video game based around a masked protagonist with supernatural powers, very similar to Jack. In an interview a developer , he claims the date for Dishonored (1837) was chosen because of Spring-heeled Jack. I think that's worth adding to the popular culture section.

216.154.41.18 (talk) 18:20, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

References

Regarding the History/Precedents section.

Hello.

In the History/Precedents section, it says that "some writers have argued (that they) formed the foundation of the later legend of Spring-heeled Jack.". However, according to a letter to the Sheffield Times in 1808 during the activity of mentioned events, the name "Springheeled Jack" was actually used already then, explaining; “Years ago a famous Ghost walked and played many pranks in this historic neighbourhood, he was nicknamed the Park Ghost or Spring Heeled Jack”.More here

I think this should be clarified in the section in question, that the name Spring Heeled Jack was used already then for the then reported entity.

The best/Okama-San (talk) 17:26, 10 September 2019 (UTC)