Judging by which post of mine you tagged, perhaps you did not...

Judging by which post of mine you tagged, perhaps you did not see my earlier one where I briefly
mentioned this and posted the following link...
https://www.peterlbrandt.com/do-continuation-head-and-shoulders-patterns-really-exist/
Schabacker together with Edwards & Magee, are the forefathers of Classical
Charting and I am in agreement with Peter's perspective on the topic.
I'm not sure who you mean by "widely accepted" but there are not many people who know much
about Classical Chart Patterns who would be bold enough to argue with him regarding it...
Personally, it is a pattern I trade quite often and with a good degree of success as far as patterns
come. Without it, there is no doubt my returns would be much lower...

The standard Cup & Handle itself has a MUCH later origination & is first mentioned, if I am not mistaken,
by William O’Neil in the first edition of his book - How to Make Money In Stocks, first published in
1988. That is some 56 years later than the first publication of Shabacker's work (1932) and 40
years after that of Edwards & Magee! It has however become a most commonly traded (and tradable)
pattern which is fine by me...

Beyond that, as you say there are myriads of "patterns" and variations of patterns being loosely
defined left and right on social media. Some by successful traders but mostly by amateurs who
live behind a facade of hot air. Some of these "patterns" may even be tradable with proper risk
metrics, which as many fail to understand, is way more important to a successful trading operation
than the particular form of the chart analysis... Nevertheless, I do find it rather frustrating because
communication becomes most challenging when things become so subjectively defined.
In a normal world, you might have been able to search google (or Hotcopper) for mentions of
patterns and actually come across a few decent trade candidates without having to sift through
an overwhelming amount of garbage...

All the best.