they are described as a fusion of a family and a gang, due to the fact most hillbillies in Red Dead 2 kind of go by the old "inbred" stereotype (both for comedy and for horror elements.. the Murfree are clearly the horror version).
Kazujojo wrote: from the looks of things, Murfree Brood, along with Skinner Brothers, sounds like minor antagonists. Not a lot of infos are written on both gangs.
I hope you realize that some minor villains out there are very much allowed as long as enough information about them is available. Plus, there's enough info on both articles for them to be over the bare minimum requirements.
plus these articles were clearly rushed, there's a lot of faulty info and mistakes I'm going to try and fix - the Brood are actually horrific antagonists, they are also enemy mobs.. which means info is scarce as you'd encounter them in "the wild" (like when you fight goblins etc in D&D, not much info because there's not much to say.. doesn't make them less dangerous).
only they *do* contribute to a story, it's called world-building.. bandits, thieves, monsters etc make a world feel alive.. without them there's no exploration, no real fun and a game's length is shortened significantly.. also both factions play pivotal parts in the main story, so it's not the case.
the hero must fight the Brood to save an ally and he must fight the Skinner Brothers for bounties etc.
You need to tone it down with some of the categories you are adding to certain pages. When was it ever established that Cannibals are automatically "Monsters"? Many cannibalistic villains are more often than not regular human beings specifically for more realistic works, so to claim that every cannibal is a monster is a bold claim. You're painting the category with an extremely broad brush by adding Monsters as a subcategory to Cannibals.
Additionally, we have a rule in place against adding the Monsters category to Demons and Cosmic Entities. Villains under that category are already a big step up from your usual monster since they are much more intangible beings in nature. Adding the monsters category to pages with those categories already there is redundant.
And last but not least: Gollum? An alien? No. He is not a being from another planet in-universe and started out as an ordinary Hobbit. So I'm just going to assume that's borderline category abuse.
Bottom line, don't abuse categories and make wild claims to get your reasoning across.
And not every single work including a cannibal is folklore? Again, painting the category with a very broad brush.
Oh and, Gollum just so happening to look like an alien means nothing. He's not an actual alien in the Middle-earth universe, through and through. Your reasoning behind Gollum being an alien is just plain ludicrous.
also Anthropophage is a specific type of folkloric monster, doesn't mean all cannibals are Anthropophage.
oh and Gollum looks NOTHING like a Grey, if anything he's more like a goblin.. which is because he's a mutated Hobbit.. a magical creature.. absolutely no relation to UFOs etc.. this is like saying dragons are aliens because they "look like reptoids".