This  level-3 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Poetry High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Literature High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Anthropology: Oral tradition High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce.

The proposed list of epics is getting longer and longer. Are these all truly epics? For example, is The Battle of Marathon by Elizabeth Barrett Browning truly an epic? Pete unseth (talk) 01:22, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Even if we remove some entrants, the list is too long. Maybe we need a separate page titled "List of epics". In that case, I think that List of world folk-epics and the list from National epic should also be merged into that "List of epics". Vanjagenije (talk) 08:56, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for removing them. 2600:8806:340B:E100:A0EA:A3B4:8CB3:563A (talk) 02:05, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will be recording the audio for this article for the Spoken Wikipedia Community. If anyone else is already working on it, kindly let me know to avoid duplication. A response would be appreciated. Adilalishah 16:38, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Epic poetry → Epic
• Epic → Epic (disambiguation)

– An "epic poem" is usually called an epic, as in the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Homeric epics (part of the Epic Cycle). I have never heard anyone call these "epic poems", and ngrams unequivocally support this. The three aforementioned epics form the foundation of Western literature and have significantly influenced Western culture, so by historical and academic significance alone, it is the clear primary topic. Epic (disambiguation) lists one other primary-topic contender, epic film, a genre that was specifically derived from epics in the classical literary sense; no other topic is anywhere near these two in terms of notability. Per WP:NOTDICT, we can disregard the adjective meaning "heroic or grand", and even that was derived from the literary genre as well. Epic is widely understood to mean an ancient long poem, and it is the first definition you get if you look up the term on any major dictionary (notice how "epic poem" is not a valid dictionary definition). InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:20, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose "epic poetry" or "epic poem" is more recognizable. This is fine as is. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:35, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, poetry might have been the definite primary in 1925 Wikipedia, but then epic films became a 'thing'. Disamb covers both and more. Plus per Pppery, 'Epic poetry' is better recognized by the topic's full name. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:53, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  "Epic" is already the full name of the topic, and has been so since 1583. We only added "poetry" to our article's title as a means of natural disambiguation, i.e. as an alternative to Epic (poetry). Per the ngrams I linked, nobody really calls it that in the real world. The emergence of epic films as an offshoot of "epic poems", in my opinion, does not surpass the older and more impactful topic in terms of long-term significance. Take a look at how often "epic films" are discussed in academic sources. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:51, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Times change, language is fluid. Oppose Garnet Moss (talk) 23:33, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. In terms of usage in highest quality sources, there is no question that the primary meaning is the poetry. All other usage is derivative and making that clear is of educational value. Srnec (talk) 07:32, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. This would result in occluding the difference between Epic poetry and Epic (genre). In fact, because the genre is broader in scope, that might make more sense to have at a plain title as a catchall for the main uses. Dekimasuよ! 08:42, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The broader genre was also spun out of poetry. The article says so itself: The defining characteristics of the genre are mostly derived from its roots in ancient poetry. This is like how Barbie (the doll) led to Barbie (media franchise), which led to List of Barbie films, which led to Barbie (film), but the original doll is so deeply influential and impactful that it remains the primary topic. Every modern "epic" work seeks to emulate the epics of antiquity; when we say something is "epic", we mean it is comparable to the scope and grandeur of poetic epics. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:30, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, there is an original usage, but the use of "epic" to refer to prose dates to at least the 1700s and its application to film is also over 100 years old (as noted in your OED link above). War and Peace, Journey to the West, Gone with the Wind, Lawrence of Arabia, Birth of a Nation, etc. have all long been called epics, and that usage does not rely on whether its users are familiar with Homer or Beowulf. We aren't talking about a neologism here. Dekimasuよ! 04:47, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Sure, but in the end, which one clearly has far greater long-term significance? The modern epics of Lawrence of Arabia and War and Peace are certainly influential and notable, but they are nowhere near the cultural impact and historical significance of the ancient epics of Beowulf and the Odyssey. Even today, epic films are (relatively) rarely discussed in academic sources, paling in comparison to a persistently high interest in epic poetry. These ngrams exclude "epic(s)" as a standalone noun, which would paint an even more drastic picture. Another ngram to take a look: [1]. InfiniteNexus (talk) 08:37, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]